Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2015 Sep 4;16(1):101.
doi: 10.1186/s12931-015-0267-6.

The Salford Lung Study protocol: a pragmatic, randomised phase III real-world effectiveness trial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

The Salford Lung Study protocol: a pragmatic, randomised phase III real-world effectiveness trial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Nawar Diar Bakerly et al. Respir Res. .

Abstract

Background: New treatments need to be evaluated in real-world clinical practice to account for co-morbidities, adherence and polypharmacy.

Methods: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ≥ 40 years old, with exacerbation in the previous 3 years are randomised 1:1 to once-daily fluticasone furoate 100 μg/vilanterol 25 μg in a novel dry-powder inhaler versus continuing their existing therapy. The primary endpoint is the mean annual rate of COPD exacerbations; an electronic medical record allows real-time collection and monitoring of endpoint and safety data.

Conclusions: The Salford Lung Study is the world's first pragmatic randomised controlled trial of a pre-licensed medication in COPD.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01551758.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design. COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; DPI = dry-powder inhaler; FF = fluticasone furoate; GP = general practitioner; ICS = inhaled corticosteroid; LABA = long-acting β2-agonist; LAMA = long-acting muscarinic antagonist; Rx = treatment; VI = vilanterol

References

    1. Calverley PM, Rennard SI. What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD? Lancet. 2007;370:774–85. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61381-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roche N, Reddel H, Martin R, Brusselle G, Papi A, Thomas M, et al. Quality standards for real-world research. Focus on observational database studies of comparative effectiveness. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014;11(Suppl 2):S99–104. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201309-300RM. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Claxton AJ, Cramer J, Pierce C. A systematic review of the associations between dose regimens and medication compliance. Clin Ther. 2001;23:1296–310. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(01)80109-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jones P, Harding G, Wiklund I, Berry P, Leidy N. Improving the process and outcome of care in COPD: development of a standardised assessment tool. Prim Care Respir J. 2009;18:208–15. doi: 10.4104/pcrj.2009.00053. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. New JP, Delderfield MR, Stein ND, Austin S, Vestbo J, Woodcock AA. Assessing the burden of asthma and COPD in Salford UK: retrospective analysis using a whole population electronic medical record. Eur Respir J. 2011;38(Suppl 55):732S.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data