Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Risk of adverse reactions associated with inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis

      research-article
      , BM a , , BM b , * ,
      Medicine
      Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
      adverse effects, COPD, inhaled corticosteroids

      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

          Background:

          In the majority of current therapeutic regimens for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bronchodilators are coupled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to lower the inflammatory response and improve symptoms. This study aims to evaluate the safety of ICS in the treatment of COPD.

          Methods:

          Randomized controlled trials related to ICS for COPD that were eligible up to 1 June 2023 were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. We searched and screened eligible studies for the occurrence of total adverse events, cardiovascular events, upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders, and finally analyzed them by Review Manager 5.4.1.

          Results:

          The results showed that ICS increased the incidence of adverse reactions in COPD patients (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03–1.10, P = .0004); ICS treatment did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in COPD patients (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.88–1.02, P = .14); ICS increased the incidence of URTI in COPD patients (RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.02–1.62, P = .03); ICS increased the incidence of pneumonia in patients with COPD (RR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.63–2.69, P < .00001); ICS treatment significantly increased the incidence of oral Candida in patients with COPD (RR = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.99–4.41, P < .00001); ICS increased the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.51–5.45, P = .001).

          Conclusion:

          ICS does not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with COPD, but it does increase the risk of URTI, pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?

          It has been suggested that the quality of clinical trials should be assessed by blinded raters to limit the risk of introducing bias into meta-analyses and systematic reviews, and into the peer-review process. There is very little evidence in the literature to substantiate this. This study describes the development of an instrument to assess the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in pain research and its use to determine the effect of rater blinding on the assessments of quality. A multidisciplinary panel of six judges produced an initial version of the instrument. Fourteen raters from three different backgrounds assessed the quality of 36 research reports in pain research, selected from three different samples. Seven were allocated randomly to perform the assessments under blind conditions. The final version of the instrument included three items. These items were scored consistently by all the raters regardless of background and could discriminate between reports from the different samples. Blind assessments produced significantly lower and more consistent scores than open assessments. The implications of this finding for systematic reviews, meta-analytic research and the peer-review process are discussed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2017 Report. GOLD Executive Summary

            American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 195(5), 557-582
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease: the GOLD science committee report 2019

              Precision medicine is a patient-specific approach that integrates all relevant clinical, genetic and biological information in order to optimise the therapeutic benefit relative to the possibility of side-effects for each individual. Recent clinical trials have shown that higher blood eosinophil counts are associated with a greater efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Blood eosinophil counts are a biomarker with potential to be used in clinical practice, to help target ICS treatment with more precision in COPD patients with a history of exacerbations despite appropriate bronchodilator treatment. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 pharmacological treatment algorithms, based on the ABCD assessment, can be applied relatively easily to treatment-naive individuals at initial presentation. However, their use is more problematic during follow-up in patients who are already on maintenance treatment. There is a need for a different system to guide COPD pharmacological management during follow-up. Recent large randomised controlled trials have provided important new information concerning the therapeutic effects of ICSs and long-acting bronchodilators on exacerbations. The new evidence regarding blood eosinophils and inhaled treatments, and the need to distinguish between initial and follow-up pharmacological management, led to changes in the GOLD pharmacological treatment recommendations. This article explains the evidence and rationale for the GOLD 2019 pharmacological treatment recommendations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                MD
                Medicine
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                0025-7974
                1536-5964
                19 January 2024
                19 January 2024
                : 103
                : 3
                : e36609
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Cangnan County Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China
                [b ]Department of Acupuncture, Cangnan County Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China.
                Author notes
                [* ] Correspondence: Xinghua Mao, BM, Department of Acupuncture, Cangnan County Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China (e-mail: nlby000@ 123456sina.com ).
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2985-8081
                Article
                00033
                10.1097/MD.0000000000036609
                10798756
                38241558
                ea98f51a-e34c-43f2-8cb6-776f758647ce
                Copyright © 2024 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.

                History
                : 26 September 2023
                : 18 November 2023
                : 21 November 2023
                Categories
                6700
                Research Article
                Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                adverse effects,copd,inhaled corticosteroids
                adverse effects, copd, inhaled corticosteroids

                Comments

                Comment on this article