Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 881

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Open access
Casaburi, R., Mahler, D.A., Jones, P.W., Wanner, A., San Pedro, G., ZuWallack, R.L., Menjoge, S.S., Serby, C.W., Witek, T.·2002·European Respiratory Journal

Abstract

Currently available inhaled bronchodilators used as therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) necessitate multiple daily dosing. The present study evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium, a new once-daily anticholinergic in COPD. Patients with stable COPD (age 65.2±8.7 yrs (mean±sd), n=921) were enrolled in two identical randomized double-blind placebo-controlled 1-yr studies. Patients inhaled tiotropium 18 µg or placebo (mean screening forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1) 1.01 versus 0.99 L, 39.1 and 38.1% of the predicted value) once daily as a dry powder. The primary spirometric outcome was trough FEV 1(i.e.FEV 1 prior to dosing). Changes in dyspnoea were measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index, and health status with the disease-specific St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the generic Short Form 36. Medication use and adverse events were recorded. Tiotropium provided significantly superior bronchodilation relative to placebo for trough FEV 1 response (∼12% over baseline) (p<0.01) and mean response during the 3 h following dosing (∼22% over baseline) (p<0.001) over the 12-month period. Tiotropium recipients showed less dyspnoea (p<0.001), superior health status scores, and fewer COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations (p<0.05). Adverse events were comparable with placebo, except for dry mouth incidence (tiotropium 16.0%versus placebo 2.7%, p<0.05). Tiotropium is an effective, once-daily bronchodilator that reduces dyspnoea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation frequency and improves health status. This suggests that tiotropium will make an important contribution to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1183/09031936.02.00269802

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 881

Metadata

Authors
Casaburi, R., Mahler, D. A., Jones, P. W., Wanner, A., San Pedro, G., ZuWallack, R. L., Menjoge, S. S., Serby, C. W., & Witek, T.
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Published
2002-02
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
217-224
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
OpenAlex
W2149199480
Cited by
881
References
2
FWCI
52.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1183/09031936.02.00269802
The paper
Casaburi, R., Mahler, D. A., Jones, P. W., Wanner, A., San Pedro, G., ZuWallack, R. L., Menjoge, S. S., Serby, C. W., & Witek, T. (2002). A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. European Respiratory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.02.00269802

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.