↓ Skip to main content

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in the prevention of clinically important deterioration in COPD: results from the FLAME study

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in the prevention of clinically important deterioration in COPD: results from the FLAME study
Published in
Respiratory Research, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12931-018-0830-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio R. Anzueto, Konstantinos Kostikas, Karen Mezzi, Steven Shen, Michael Larbig, Francesco Patalano, Robert Fogel, Donald Banerji, Jadwiga A. Wedzicha

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive disease and a composite endpoint could be an indicator of treatment effect on disease worsening. This post-hoc analysis assessed whether indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50 μg once daily reduced the risk of clinically important deterioration (CID) versus salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) 50/500 μg twice daily in moderate-to-very severe COPD patients from the FLAME study. CID was defined as ≥100 mL decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) or ≥ 4-unit increase in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score or a moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation. Changes from baseline in the rate of moderate and severe exacerbations, time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation, and change from baseline in the SGRQ score, measured after Week 12 up to Week 52, were assessed by presence of early CID (CID+) or absence of CID (CID-) at Week 12. IND/GLY significantly delayed the time to CID (hazard ratio [HR] (95% confidence interval [CI]), 0.72 [0.67-0.78]; P < 0.0001), and reduced the incidences of CID versus SFC. Additionally, IND/GLY delayed the time to CID in all patient subgroups. After 12 weeks until 52 weeks, CID+ patients had a significantly higher rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations versus CID- patients (P < 0.0001); moreover, CID+ patients experienced moderate-to-severe exacerbations significantly earlier versus CID- patients (P < 0.0001). CID+ patients had a comparable change in the SGRQ total score versus CID- patients. IND/GLY reduced the risk of CID versus SFC. CID had a significant impact on long-term exacerbation outcomes in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of ≥1 exacerbations in the previous year. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01782326 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 23 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 22 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,151,813
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#919
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,797
of 341,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#28
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 341,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.