Blog
About

1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A comparison of tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium alone in terms of treatment effect for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis: Retraction

      Medicine

      Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The article “A comparison of tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium alone in terms of treatment effect for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis”,[1] which appeared in Volume 99, Issue 16 of Medicine is being retracted after an investigation of reader concerns. The concerns, published on the Medicine Correspondence Blog,[2] detail a misrepresentation of data as post-treatment efficacy data and the inappropriate use of selected studies in the meta-analysis. Authors were unresponsive in providing corrections to address the raised concerns.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 1

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          A comparison of tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium alone in terms of treatment effect for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

           Jie He,  Jiang-Tao Lin (2020)
          Abstract Background: Combinations of long-acting bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action are recommended to improve prognosis and reduce risk of adverse events of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is unclear whether the new combination therapy with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA) olodaterol (OLO) was superior to tiotropium alone. Methods: We measured the efficacy of the TIO/OLO combination vsTIO alone for COPD patients based on electronic databases up to February 2019. After rigorous quality review, data was extracted from eligible trials. All the main outcomes were pooled analysis using RevMan software. Results: A total of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. The pooled results of our meta-analysis demonstrated that FEV1 [MD = 0.03, 95% CI (−0.01,0.07), P = .18], FVC [MD = -0.03, 95%CI (−0.06,0.00), P = .09] and FEV1%pred [MD = 0.35, 95%CI (−0.30, 0.99), P = .29] all showed no significant difference between the 2 groups. The overall incidence of adverse effects (AEs) [OR = 1.01,95%CI (0.93,1.09), P = .87] and serious AEs [OR = 1.04,95% CI (0.82, 1.32), P = .72] in the combination group was similar to that of the TIO alone group, without statistical significance. Conclusion: These studies reported that the TIO/OLO combination did not show superior effects than tiotropium alone for COPD. Additionally, both therapies were well tolerated.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Journal
            Medicine (Baltimore)
            Medicine (Baltimore)
            MEDI
            Medicine
            Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
            0025-7974
            1536-5964
            18 September 2020
            18 September 2020
            18 September 2020
            : 99
            : 38
            Article
            MD-D-20-08672 22420
            10.1097/MD.0000000000022420
            7505350
            Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

            This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

            Product
            Categories
            Retraction
            Custom metadata
            TRUE

            Comments

            Comment on this article