ArticlePLoS medicine2025
The comparative effectiveness and safety of fluticasone-salmeterol via metered-dose versus dry powder inhalers for COPD: A new user cohort study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Supported nanoparticles and single-atom catalysts for the synthesis of deuterated alcohols.Communications chemistry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFluticasone-salmeterol is available in both metered-dose and dry powder inhaler formulations for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Metered-dose inhalers are associated with substantially higher greenhouse gas emissions than dry powder inhalers; however, data on their comparative effectiveness and safety in COPD remain limited. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of fluticasone-salmeterol delivered via metered-dose inhaler (Advair HFA) versus dry powder inhaler (Advair Diskus) among patients with COPD treated in routine care. METHODS AND
findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics DataMart (January 1, 2007 to November 30, 2023). The study included 202,052 commercially insured patients aged 40 years or older with COPD who had continuous insurance coverage for 180 days prior to cohort entry and had not initiated any inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β₂-agonist during that period. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol via a metered-dose inhaler (exposure) were compared to those receiving these drugs via a dry powder inhaler (referent), with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting applied for covariate adjustment. The primary effectiveness outcome was the incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation within 365 days of cohort entry. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of first pneumonia hospitalization during the same period. Use of fluticasone-salmeterol via metered-dose inhaler was associated with a similar hazard of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.08) and first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.14) compared to the dry powder inhaler. Primary study limitations include potential residual confounding despite weighting and short follow-up times.
conclusionsIn this cohort study comparing two brand-name fluticasone-salmeterol inhalers prescribed for COPD in routine clinical practice, effectiveness and safety outcomes were similar for patients receiving metered-dose and dry powder versions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.