↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

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

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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

Suzanne Bollmeier, Theresa Prosser

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Researcher 8 16%
Other 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Computer Science 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 7 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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
#12,925,574
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#547
of 1,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,426
of 267,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#18
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 267,542 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 59% of its contemporaries.