Observational studyInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2026
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Fluticasone-Umeclidinium-Vilanterol and Beclomethasone-Glycopyrronium-Formoterol Single-Inhaler Triple Therapies for COPD: Real-World Observational Study.
Observational study in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Fluticasone-Umeclidinium-Vilanterol and Beclomethasone-Glycopyrronium-Formoterol Single-Inhaler Triple Therapies for COPD: Real-World Observational Study [Response to 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Multiple guidelines recommend single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) for some patients with COPD. The first two SITTs approved for COPD were beclomethasone-glycopyrronium-formoterol (BEGF, twice daily) and fluticasone-umeclidinium-vilanterol (FUV, once daily). No study has compared the effectiveness and safety of these SITTs on major outcomes. Patients and Methods: We identified a cohort of patients with COPD, 40 years of age or older, from the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The patients who initiated treatment with FUV or BEGF were compared on the incidence of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations, and of pneumonia, over one year, after balancing baseline characteristics by propensity score weighting. Results: The study cohort included 34,825 initiators of FUV and 39,288 initiators of BEGF, well balanced after weighing. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with FUV compared with BEGF was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89-0.93), while for severe exacerbation it was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86-0.97), corresponding to 27.9 fewer subjects with a moderate or severe exacerbation and 1.0 fewer with a severe exacerbation per 100 treated with FUV for one year. The HR of pneumonia requiring hospitalisation, comparing FUV with BEGF, was 1.06 (95% CI 0.99-1.13), over all patients. It was 1.14 (95% CI 1.06-1.24) among those classified as GOLD Group E, and 1.10 (95% CI 1.02-1.19) among those with a blood eosinophil count ≤ 300 cells/µL, corresponding to increases of 1.7 and 1.0 more subjects with a severe pneumonia per 100 treated with FUV for one year, respectively. Conclusion: In a real-world clinical practice setting of COPD treatment, initiating triple therapy with FUV was associated with a lower incidence of moderate and severe exacerbations than with BEGF. On the other hand, the incidence of a severe pneumonia requiring hospitalisation was higher with FUV among GOLD Group E subjects or those whose blood eosinophil count is not elevated.
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.