| Title |
Scientific rationale for the possible inhaled corticosteroid intraclass difference in the risk of pneumonia in COPD
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s143656 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christer Janson, Georgios Stratelis, Anna Miller-Larsson, Tim W Harrison, Kjell Larsson |
| Abstract |
Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) treatment combined with long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) reduces the risk of exacerbations in COPD, but the use of ICSs is associated with increased incidence of pneumonia. There are indications that this association is stronger for fluticasone propionate than for budesonide. We have examined systematic reviews assessing the risk of pneumonia associated with fluticasone propionate and budesonide COPD therapy. Compared with placebo or LABAs, we found that fluticasone propionate was associated with 43%-78% increased risk of pneumonia, while only slightly increased risk or no risk was found for budesonide. We have evaluated conceivable mechanisms which may explain this difference and suggest that the higher pneumonia risk with fluticasone propionate treatment is caused by greater and more protracted immunosuppressive effects locally in the airways/lungs. These effects are due to the much slower dissolution of fluticasone propionate particles in airway luminal fluid, resulting in a slower uptake into the airway tissue and a much longer presence of fluticasone propionate in airway epithelial lining fluid. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Mexico | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 37% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 February 2019.
All research outputs
#8,264,793
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,016
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,403
of 331,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#24
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 331,218 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 65% of its contemporaries.