Research Reviews
A recent collection of 4 studies have recently been published in the Lancet (Titled: Efficacy and safety of RPL554, a dual PDE3 and PDE4 inhibitor, in healthy volunteers and in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: findings from four clinical trials http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(13)70187-5/fulltext).
Now first it's important that I mention that it was in the Lancet, as this is a
prestigious science journal and so we can consider that this study was important and convincing, as the Lancet only publish the best studies.
The study was interested in helping patients with asthma and a related illness called chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). These illnesses affect the
respiratory system, of which more information can be found on this site. Patients with asthma and COPD breath normally, drawing air to and from the alveoli in the lungs and the nose and mouth, passing through the trachea,
bronchi and bronchioles. However these patient find some that if they breath in
small particles (perhaps dust), they get a dangerous reaction that other people
don't get. This reaction causes the walls of the bronchioles to tighten and their insides swell. This means that there is little space for air to flow to and from the alveoli, potentially meaning that the patient can suffocate and die.
The good news for these patients is that medicines can be breathed in which reduce the tightness of the walls of the bronchioles (anti inflammatory) and reduce the swelling inside them (bronchodilators). The bad news is that these medicines don't work that well in the worse case patients. And so comes the point of the series of studies recently published in the Lancet (online on 25/10/2013) and written by a team led by Franciosi. They wanted to test a new drug called RPL554 (catchy eh), which reduces the action of substances which cause bronchial constriction and inflammation of the muscles in their walls.
A few important points about the studies are that 1) patients were involved from different countries, so the findings are likely to be due to a real effect, rather than something unrelated and particular to one country. 2) patients got either the medicine, or an ineffective fake medicine called a placebo (without knowing which one they got), meaning that if the patients had an effect just because they convinced themselves that the medicine was effective, that this would be detectable. 3) patients got the medicine or placebo randomly, meaning that the investigators couldn't twist the study to show a particular outcome by selecting particular patients to either group.
The studies found that the new medicine was safe for breathing in. Also was also found that the new medicine increased the volume of air that an asthma patient could blow out in 1 second (called FEV1). Also this increase in FEV1 was greater than placebo and the amount that the new medicine increased FEV1 was way beyond the threshold that scientists would consider to be convincing (termed as "statistically significant").
The studies show that RPL554 could be a valuable new treatment for asthma and COPD. However further studies are required to confirm this studies findings. This is required for a number of reasons, one being that few patients were included (no more than 21 in each of the 4 studies). Therefore any effects of the medicine may only be great in a particular type of patient, coincidentally represented by those in the studies.
Now first it's important that I mention that it was in the Lancet, as this is a
prestigious science journal and so we can consider that this study was important and convincing, as the Lancet only publish the best studies.
The study was interested in helping patients with asthma and a related illness called chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). These illnesses affect the
respiratory system, of which more information can be found on this site. Patients with asthma and COPD breath normally, drawing air to and from the alveoli in the lungs and the nose and mouth, passing through the trachea,
bronchi and bronchioles. However these patient find some that if they breath in
small particles (perhaps dust), they get a dangerous reaction that other people
don't get. This reaction causes the walls of the bronchioles to tighten and their insides swell. This means that there is little space for air to flow to and from the alveoli, potentially meaning that the patient can suffocate and die.
The good news for these patients is that medicines can be breathed in which reduce the tightness of the walls of the bronchioles (anti inflammatory) and reduce the swelling inside them (bronchodilators). The bad news is that these medicines don't work that well in the worse case patients. And so comes the point of the series of studies recently published in the Lancet (online on 25/10/2013) and written by a team led by Franciosi. They wanted to test a new drug called RPL554 (catchy eh), which reduces the action of substances which cause bronchial constriction and inflammation of the muscles in their walls.
A few important points about the studies are that 1) patients were involved from different countries, so the findings are likely to be due to a real effect, rather than something unrelated and particular to one country. 2) patients got either the medicine, or an ineffective fake medicine called a placebo (without knowing which one they got), meaning that if the patients had an effect just because they convinced themselves that the medicine was effective, that this would be detectable. 3) patients got the medicine or placebo randomly, meaning that the investigators couldn't twist the study to show a particular outcome by selecting particular patients to either group.
The studies found that the new medicine was safe for breathing in. Also was also found that the new medicine increased the volume of air that an asthma patient could blow out in 1 second (called FEV1). Also this increase in FEV1 was greater than placebo and the amount that the new medicine increased FEV1 was way beyond the threshold that scientists would consider to be convincing (termed as "statistically significant").
The studies show that RPL554 could be a valuable new treatment for asthma and COPD. However further studies are required to confirm this studies findings. This is required for a number of reasons, one being that few patients were included (no more than 21 in each of the 4 studies). Therefore any effects of the medicine may only be great in a particular type of patient, coincidentally represented by those in the studies.