ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026
Efficacy and safety of tiotropium in partial and uncontrolled preschool asthma (TIPP): a phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preschool children with asthma are more susceptible to develop acute life-threatening respiratory distress leading to hospital admissions compared to school children and treatment options are limited for this age group. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of tiotropium as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in preschool children with high-risk, partly controlled or uncontrolled asthma. Methods: TIPP was a phase III, prospective, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group (investigator-initiated) trial conducted at 13 German centres (12 hospitals, one specialised medical practice). Children aged 1-5 years with physician-diagnosed asthma, partly controlled or uncontrolled symptoms despite ICS, and a history of severe exacerbations were randomly assigned to receive once-daily tiotropium (two puffs of 1.25 μg) via Respimat® inhaler or placebo as add-on to ICS therapy over 52 weeks. The primary outcome was time to first severe asthma exacerbation requiring hospitalisation and/or systemic corticosteroid treatment. All randomised participants were included in the intention-to-treat analysis and analysed by treatment received for safety. No primary or safety data were missing; therefore, no imputation was required. The study was registered in the "EU Clinical Trials Registry" (EudraCT 2021-000190-81). Findings: Between February 2022 and March 2025, 100 of the planned 204 children were enrolled, of whom 86 were randomised to tiotropium + ICS (n = 44) or placebo + ICS (n = 42). Mean age was 3.3 years (Standard deviation (SD) 1.3). The primary outcome time to first severe asthma exacerbation did not differ between groups (Hazard ratio (HR): 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-1.92; p = 0.98). At least one adverse event was reported in 41 (93%) of 44 children in the tiotropium + ICS group and 42 (100%) of 42 children in the placebo + ICS group. 397 adverse events were reported with tiotropium + ICS group and 450 with placebo + ICS group. Tiotropium was well tolerated, and no new safety signal was identified. Interpretation: Tiotropium did not reduce the risk of a severe asthma exacerbation, but was well tolerated as add-on therapy to ICS in preschool children with high-risk asthma. Funding: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01KG2030); study medication provided by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (0205-0546).
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.