ArticleAdvances in therapy2025
Comparative Effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FORM in Patients with COPD Stepping Up From Dual Therapy.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Real-World Effectiveness of Fixed-Dose Triple Therapy Regimens in COPD: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/GLY/FOR in Moderate-to-Very Severe COPD.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Response to: Letter to the Editor Regarding "Comparative Effectiveness of FF/1 UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FORM in Patients with COPD Stepping Up From Dual Therapy".Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor Regarding "Comparative Effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FORM in Patients with COPD Stepping Up From Dual Therapy".Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FORM in Patients with COPD Stepping Up from Dual Therapy Stratified by Exacerbations and Prior Dual Therapy: A Subgroup Analysis of a Comparative Effectiveness Study.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Fluticasone-Umeclidinium-Vilanterol and Beclomethasone-Glycopyrronium-Formoterol Single-Inhaler Triple Therapies for COPD: Real-World Observational Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Observational
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Fluticasone-Umeclidinium-Vilanterol and Beclomethasone-Glycopyrronium-Formoterol Single-Inhaler Triple Therapies for COPD: Real-World Observational Study [Letter].International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRecent data suggest differences in effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapies (SITTs) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, data specifically from patients previously treated with dual bronchodilator therapy are lacking. This real-world comparative effectiveness study assessed patients with COPD treated with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) and budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BUD/GLY/FORM) who stepped up from dual therapy.
methodsThis retrospective study used healthcare claims from the Komodo Research database to identify patients with COPD and Medicare Fee-for-Service insurance on dual therapy as their most recent treatment in the 90 days pre-index, stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI or BUD/GLY/FORM between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2023. Primary outcome was annualized rate of moderate-severe exacerbations per patient-year (PPY) compared using rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from Poisson regression models after adjustment with overlap weighting. Secondary outcomes were time to first moderate-severe exacerbation (analyzed as a composite and separately), reported using Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis and compared using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs from weighted Cox regression models. All-cause mortality (KM analysis) was included as an exploratory outcome.
resultsOverall, 10,093 FF/UMEC/VI and 3926 BUD/GLY/FORM patients stepping up from dual therapy were included. Patients stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI experienced an 18% significantly lower rate of moderate-severe COPD exacerbations compared with BUD/GLY/FORM [0.80 vs. 0.98 PPY; RR (95% CI) 0.82 (0.77, 0.88); P < 0.001]. Stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI was also associated with a 14% lower risk of moderate-severe COPD exacerbations [HR (95% CI) 0.86 (0.81, 0.92); P < 0.001] and 18% lower risk of all-cause mortality [HR (95% CI) 0.82 (0.68, 0.99); P = 0.040] at 12 months compared with BUD/GLY/FORM.
conclusionIn this real-world study, SITT with FF/UMEC/VI was associated with a significantly lower rate and risk of exacerbations compared with BUD/GLY/FORM in patients stepping up from dual therapy.
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.