146
Views
28
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Comparative efficacy of long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapies in COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

, , &
Pages 2495-2517 | Published online: 16 Nov 2015

Figures & data

Figure 1 Flow chart of study selection process.

Abbreviations: CDSR, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review; CENTRAL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; CSR, clinical study report; DARE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects; EU-CTR, EU Clinical Trials Register; HTA, Health Technology Assessment; NMA, network meta-analysis; PROSPERO, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; SLR, systematic literature review; WHO ICTRP, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
Figure 1 Flow chart of study selection process.

Table 1 Key study characteristics for all studies included (only arms of interest)

Table 2 Key patient characteristics at baseline for all studies included (only arms of interest)

Figure 2 Overall network of studies in the network meta-analysis of umeclidinium versus other LAMAs or placebo for (A) trough FEV1 at 12 weeks, (B) trough FEV1 at 24 weeks, (C) SGRQ total score at 24 weeks, (D) TDI focal score at 24 weeks, and (E) rescue medication use at 24 weeks.

Note: Gray italic text indicates studies that did not report measures of uncertainty.
Abbreviations: BD, twice-daily; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in 1 second; LAMA, long-acting muscarinic antagonist; OD, once-daily; PBO, placebo; SGRQ, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire; TDI, transitional dyspnea index.
Figure 2 Overall network of studies in the network meta-analysis of umeclidinium versus other LAMAs or placebo for (A) trough FEV1 at 12 weeks, (B) trough FEV1 at 24 weeks, (C) SGRQ total score at 24 weeks, (D) TDI focal score at 24 weeks, and (E) rescue medication use at 24 weeks.

Table 3 Individual study results for trough FEV1, SGRQ total scores, TDI focal scores, and rescue medication use

Figure 3 Differences in intervention versus the comparator for change from baseline in (A) trough FEV1 (mL) at 12 weeks, (B) trough FEV1 (mL) at 24 weeks, (C) SGRQ total scores at 24 weeks, (D) TDI focal scores at 24 weeks, and (E) rescue medication use at 24 weeks (95% CrI and probability of the intervention being better than the comparator).

Abbreviations: CrI, credible interval; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in 1 second; SGRQ, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire; TDI, transitional dyspnea index.
Figure 3 Differences in intervention versus the comparator for change from baseline in (A) trough FEV1 (mL) at 12 weeks, (B) trough FEV1 (mL) at 24 weeks, (C) SGRQ total scores at 24 weeks, (D) TDI focal scores at 24 weeks, and (E) rescue medication use at 24 weeks (95% CrI and probability of the intervention being better than the comparator).

Table S1 Search strategy for the systematic review

Table S2 Participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) criteria

Table S3 Data extraction

Table S4 Risk of bias assessment for the included studies

Table S5 Individual study results for trough SGRQ total scores, TDI focal scores, and rescue medication use

Table S6 Differences in intervention versus the comparator for change for SGRQ total scores, TDI focal scores, and rescue medication use at 12 weeks (95% CrI and probability of the intervention being better than the comparator)