↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Fluticasone-formoterol: a systematic review of its potential role in the treatment of asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2015
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 (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Fluticasone-formoterol: a systematic review of its potential role in the treatment of asthma
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s55116
Pubmed ID
Authors

Theresa R Prosser, Suzanne G Bollmeier

Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and evaluate the available published data regarding the efficacy and safety of a combination product containing fluticasone propionate/formoterol (FP-F) in order to establish its potential role compared with other inhaled combination corticosteroid/long-acting beta2 receptor agonists for the maintenance treatment of asthma. A PubMed and EMBASE search was conducted using the terms "fluticasone propionate", "formoterol fumarate", "Flutiform(®)", and "asthma" in July 2014 to identify trials using this combination specifically for the treatment of asthma. Additional information was gathered from references cited in the identified publications, the package insert, and the ClinicalTrials. gov registry. All randomized controlled clinical trials for humans in asthma were evaluated for inclusion. Data from animal trials, clinical trials for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and non-English sources were excluded. Seven short-term safety and efficacy trials of FP-F compared with its individual components and two comparison trials of FP-F versus other combination products were identified. Generally, the incidence of drug-related adverse events was low and consistent with previously reported drug class-related adverse events (ie, pharyngitis, dysphonia, and headache). The combination of FP-F was shown to be noninferior to fluticasone propionate/salmeterol for improving predose forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV1) and 2 hours post dose FEV1. FP-F was also noninferior to budesonide/formoterol in improving predose FEV1. Other clinical endpoints, including various symptom scores, asthma control, quality of life, and subjects' assessment of the medications were not significantly different. Poor asthma control is common. The data from short-term studies indicate that this inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2 receptor agonist combination product is non-inferior to similar combination products available. As FP-F is available in different strengths, the corticosteroid dose can be titrated without changing devices. A potential advantage is that those with good technique, the same type of device could be used for both their controller and rapid relief inhaler medicines. The choice of this combination versus other similar products may be based primarily on cost.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 22%
Researcher 8 15%
Other 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 7%
Computer Science 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 10 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 June 2015.
All research outputs
#8,343,963
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#430
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,041
of 281,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#17
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 281,752 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 43 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 62% of its contemporaries.