MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321769355 · doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2022-001569

Could patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease benefit from renin angiotensin system inhibitors? A meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4321769355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongzhen Lv, Jingyi Huang, Miao Miao, Cheng Huang, Wenlu Hang, Yong Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Respiratory Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisCOPDCochrane LibraryPublication biasInternal medicineObservational studySubgroup analysisRelative riskExacerbationRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEIntensive care medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is considered related to chronic systemic inflammation. Renin angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor, exerting an anti-inflammatory action in many systems, has been demonstrated relevant to the pathogenesis of COPD. However, the association between RAS inhibitor use and prognosis of patients with COPD remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to summarise current evidence. Material and methods Databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cochran Library, were searched for eligible studies by the end of 30 September 2022. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the association of RAS inhibitor use with prognosis of COPD (mortality or risk of acute exacerbation) were selected. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment of observational studies, while the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of RCTs. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata V.15. We selected relative risk (RR) with 95% CI as the effect measure. Heterogeneity was assessed by I-squared (I 2 ) statistics. The funnel plot was used for visual assessment of publication bias. Results A total of 20 studies with 5 51 649 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. The overall analysis indicated that RAS inhibitor use decreased the risk of death in patients with COPD (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.78). Subgroup analyses were conducted according to comorbidities, race and type of RAS inhibitors, and the results kept consistent. However, in the pooled analysis of prospective studies, RAS inhibitor use did not significantly decrease the mortality (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.02). Additionally, the risk of exacerbations of COPD did not decrease in patients who were prescribed RAS inhibitors (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.23). The funnel plot indicated significant publication bias. Conclusion RAS inhibitor use seemed to be associated with a reduction of mortality in patients with COPD. However, the available evidence is weak due to potential biases from retrospective studies and the heterogeneity across included studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.268
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open Respiratory ResearchSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207