↓ Skip to main content

Dose-response to inhaled glycopyrrolate delivered with a novel Co-Suspension™ Delivery Technology metered dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dose-response to inhaled glycopyrrolate delivered with a novel Co-Suspension™ Delivery Technology metered dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD
Published in
Respiratory Research, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12931-016-0426-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonardo M. Fabbri, Edward M. Kerwin, Selwyn Spangenthal, Gary T. Ferguson, Roberto Rodriguez-Roisin, James Pearle, Sanjay Sethi, Chad Orevillo, Patrick Darken, Earl St. Rose, Tracy Fischer, Michael Golden, Sarvajna Dwivedi, Colin Reisner

Abstract

This study forms part of the first complete characterization of the dose-response curve for glycopyrrolate (GP) delivered using Co-Suspension™ Delivery Technology via a metered dose inhaler (MDI). We examined the lower GP MDI dose range to determine an optimal dose for patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This randomized, double-blind, chronic-dosing, balanced incomplete-block, placebo-controlled, crossover study compared six doses of GP MDI (18, 9, 4.6, 2.4, 1.2, and 0.6 μg, twice daily [BID]) with placebo MDI BID and open-label tiotropium dry powder inhaler (18 μg, once daily [QD]) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were randomized into 1 of 120 treatment sequences. Each sequence included 4 of 8 treatments administered for 14-day periods separated by 7- to 21-day washout periods. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s area under the curve from 0 to 12 h (FEV1 AUC0-12) on Day 14. Secondary efficacy endpoints included peak change from baseline (post-dose) in FEV1 and inspiratory capacity (IC) on Days 1, 7, and 14; change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough FEV1 on Days 7 and 14; change from baseline in 12-h post-dose trough FEV1 on Day 14; time to onset of action (≥10 % improvement in mean FEV1) and the proportion of patients achieving ≥12 % improvement in FEV1 on Day 1; and pre-dose trough IC on Days 7 and 14. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. GP MDI 18, 9, 4.6, and 2.4 μg demonstrated statistically significant and clinically relevant increases in FEV1 AUC0-12 compared with placebo MDI following 14 days of treatment (modified intent-to-treat population = 120). GP MDI 18 μg was non-inferior to open-label tiotropium for peak change in FEV1 on Day 1 and morning pre-dose trough FEV1 on Day 14. All doses of GP MDI were well tolerated with no unexpected safety findings. These efficacy and safety results support GP MDI 18 μg BID as the most appropriate dose for evaluation in Phase III trials in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01566773 . Registered 27 March 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Other 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 25 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 27 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,516,483
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#1,744
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,799
of 347,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#29
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.