索尔福德肺研究:COPD和哮喘临床试验的开创性比较有效性方法。

IF 2.3 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pragmatic and Observational Research Pub Date : 2017-09-20 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.2147/POR.S144157
Timothy E Albertson, Susan Murin, Mark E Sutter, James A Chenoweth
{"title":"索尔福德肺研究:COPD和哮喘临床试验的开创性比较有效性方法。","authors":"Timothy E Albertson,&nbsp;Susan Murin,&nbsp;Mark E Sutter,&nbsp;James A Chenoweth","doi":"10.2147/POR.S144157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Salford Lung Study (SLS) of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a practical, community-based, randomized, open-label pragmatic study on the efficacy and safety of the once-daily dry powder inhaler that combines the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) with the long-acting beta<sub>2</sub> agonist vilanterol (VI). The asthma component of the SLS is not yet reported but the COPD component, done over a 12-month period, found a statistically significant 8.4% reduction in COPD exacerbations when compared to usual care. No differences in adverse events, including serious adverse events and pneumonia, were noted. The importance of real-world findings, such as those found in the SLS COPD trial with inhaled FF/VI, is discussed in comparison to classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with inhaled FF/VI in COPD patients. The real-world, community-based pragmatic RCT like the SLS provides additional generalizable data with direct clinical applicability and potential usefulness in the development of practice guidelines. The results from the SLS, along with those of large and small RCTs, are supportive of the use of once-daily FF/VI in COPD maintenance therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":20399,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","volume":"8 ","pages":"175-181"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/POR.S144157","citationCount":"24","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Salford Lung Study: a pioneering comparative effectiveness approach to COPD and asthma in clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Timothy E Albertson,&nbsp;Susan Murin,&nbsp;Mark E Sutter,&nbsp;James A Chenoweth\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/POR.S144157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Salford Lung Study (SLS) of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a practical, community-based, randomized, open-label pragmatic study on the efficacy and safety of the once-daily dry powder inhaler that combines the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) with the long-acting beta<sub>2</sub> agonist vilanterol (VI). The asthma component of the SLS is not yet reported but the COPD component, done over a 12-month period, found a statistically significant 8.4% reduction in COPD exacerbations when compared to usual care. No differences in adverse events, including serious adverse events and pneumonia, were noted. The importance of real-world findings, such as those found in the SLS COPD trial with inhaled FF/VI, is discussed in comparison to classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with inhaled FF/VI in COPD patients. The real-world, community-based pragmatic RCT like the SLS provides additional generalizable data with direct clinical applicability and potential usefulness in the development of practice guidelines. The results from the SLS, along with those of large and small RCTs, are supportive of the use of once-daily FF/VI in COPD maintenance therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pragmatic and Observational Research\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"175-181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/POR.S144157\",\"citationCount\":\"24\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pragmatic and Observational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/POR.S144157\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/POR.S144157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

摘要

哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的索尔福德肺研究(SLS)是一项实用的、基于社区的、随机的、开放标签的实用研究,目的是研究每日一次的干粉吸入器的有效性和安全性,该吸入器将吸入皮质类固醇糠酸氟替卡松(FF)与长效β 2激动剂维兰特罗(VI)联合使用。SLS的哮喘成分尚未报道,但COPD成分在12个月的时间内完成。发现与常规护理相比,COPD恶化发生率显著降低8.4%。不良事件(包括严重不良事件和肺炎)没有差异。本文讨论了现实世界研究结果的重要性,例如吸入FF/VI的SLS COPD试验中发现的结果,并将其与COPD患者吸入FF/VI的经典随机对照试验(RCTs)进行了比较。现实世界中,基于社区的实用随机对照试验(如SLS)提供了额外的具有直接临床适用性和在制定实践指南中潜在用途的可推广数据。SLS的结果,以及大型和小型随机对照试验的结果,支持在COPD维持治疗中使用每日一次的FF/VI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Salford Lung Study: a pioneering comparative effectiveness approach to COPD and asthma in clinical trials.

The Salford Lung Study (SLS) of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a practical, community-based, randomized, open-label pragmatic study on the efficacy and safety of the once-daily dry powder inhaler that combines the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) with the long-acting beta2 agonist vilanterol (VI). The asthma component of the SLS is not yet reported but the COPD component, done over a 12-month period, found a statistically significant 8.4% reduction in COPD exacerbations when compared to usual care. No differences in adverse events, including serious adverse events and pneumonia, were noted. The importance of real-world findings, such as those found in the SLS COPD trial with inhaled FF/VI, is discussed in comparison to classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with inhaled FF/VI in COPD patients. The real-world, community-based pragmatic RCT like the SLS provides additional generalizable data with direct clinical applicability and potential usefulness in the development of practice guidelines. The results from the SLS, along with those of large and small RCTs, are supportive of the use of once-daily FF/VI in COPD maintenance therapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pragmatic and Observational Research
Pragmatic and Observational Research MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Pragmatic and Observational Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes data from studies designed to closely reflect medical interventions in real-world clinical practice, providing insights beyond classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While RCTs maximize internal validity for cause-and-effect relationships, they often represent only specific patient groups. This journal aims to complement such studies by providing data that better mirrors real-world patients and the usage of medicines, thus informing guidelines and enhancing the applicability of research findings across diverse patient populations encountered in everyday clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Improving the Transparency and Replicability of Consensus Methods: Respiratory Medicine as a Case Example. Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis Patient Characterization and Real-World Management Approaches in Italy. Comparing Machine Learning and Advanced Methods with Traditional Methods to Generate Weights in Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: The INFORM Study. Involvement of Root Canal Treatment in Pro-Inflammatory Processes - A Real-World Study. UK Electronic Healthcare Records for Research: A Scientometric Analysis of Respiratory, Cardiovascular, and COVID-19 Publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1