Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 341

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of tiotropium once daily, formoterol twice daily and both combined once daily in patients with COPD

Open access
van Noord, J. A., Aumann, J-L., Janssens, E., Smeets, J. J., Verhaert, J., Disse, B., Mueller, A., Cornelissen, P. J. G.·2005·European Respiratory Journal

Abstract

This study compared the bronchodilator effects of tiotropium, formoterol and both combined in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A total of 71 COPD patients (mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1) 37% predicted) participated in a randomised, double-blind, three-way, crossover study and received tiotropium 18 μg q.d., formoterol 12 μg b.i.d.or both combined q.d.for three 6-week periods. The end-points were 24-h spirometry (FEV 1, forced vital capacity (FVC)) at the end of each treatment, rescue salbutamol and safety. Compared with baseline (FEV 1 prior to the first dose in the first period), tiotropium produced a significantly greater improvement in average daytime FEV 1(0–12 h) than formoterol (127 versus 86 mL), while average night-time FEV 1(12–24 h) was not different (tiotropium 43 mL, formoterol 38 mL). The most pronounced effects were provided by combination therapy (daytime 234 mL, night-time 86 mL); both differed significantly from single-agent therapies. Changes in FVC mirrored the FEV 1 results. Compared with both single agents, daytime salbutamol use was significantly lower during combination therapy (tiotropium plus formoterol 1.81 puffs·day−1, tiotropium 2.41 puffs·day−1, formoterol 2.37 puffs·day−1). All treatments were well tolerated. In conclusion, in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, tiotropium q.d.achieved a greater improvement in daytime and comparable improvement in night-time lung function compared with formoterol b.i.d.A combination of both drugs q.d.was most effective and provided an additive effect throughout the 24-h dosing interval.

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 · 10.1183/09031936.05.00140404

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 341

Metadata

Authors
van Noord, J. A., Aumann, J.-L., Janssens, E., Smeets, J. J., Verhaert, J., Disse, B., Mueller, A., & Cornelissen, P. J. G.
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Published
2005-08
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
214-222
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
OpenAlex
W2158795682
Cited by
341
References
0
FWCI
27.87
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: Comparison of tiotropium once daily, formoterol twice daily and both combined once daily in patients with COPD. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1183/09031936.05.00140404
The paper
van Noord, J. A., Aumann, J.-L., Janssens, E., Smeets, J. J., Verhaert, J., Disse, B., Mueller, A., & Cornelissen, P. J. G. (2005). Comparison of tiotropium once daily, formoterol twice daily and both combined once daily in patients with COPD. European Respiratory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.05.00140404

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.