Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of sputum and blood eosinophils, FeNO and Methacholine PC20

From: Efficacy and safety of antagonists for chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on Th2 cells in adult patients with asthma: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Source

Groups

Baseline

Treatment endpoint

Change after treatment

P value (Intervention vs Placebo)

Significant Difference

Sputum eosinophils (10 6 /g)

Singh 2013 [13]

Intervention

NM

0.4##

NM

0.002

Yes

Control

NM

0.75##

NM

Kuna (trial 1) 2016 [21]

Intervention

0.024 (0.00 to 0.53)§

0.004 (0.00 to 0.53)§

NM

NM

No

Control

0.033 (0.00 to 1.21)§

0.014 (0.00 to 0.73)§

NM

Sputum eosinophils (%)

Barnes 2012 [11]

Intervention

2.1 (NM)‡

0.7 (NM)‡

3.1 (1.1, 8.8)§§

0.37

No

Control

1.8(NM)‡

1.2 (NM)‡

1.5 (0.4, 5.3)§§

Singh 2013 [13]

Intervention

6.0 (1.5, 23.9)‡

18.1 (10.0, 33.2)‡

NM

0.002

Yes

Control

6.0 (1.5, 23.9)‡

5.6 (2.7, 11.6)‡

Busse 2013 [17]

Intervention

2.0 (0 to 93)§

NM

−3.5 (−93 to 5)§

NM

No

1.0 (0 to 69)§

NM

−0.5 (−68 to 36)§

NM

1.0 (0 to 91)§

NM

0.0 (−72 to 6)§

NM

1.0 (0 to 80)§

NM

0.0 (−24 to 4)§

NM

Control

0.0 (0 to 53)§

NM

2.0 (−2.3 to 84)§

–

Gonem 2016 [20]

Intervention

5.4 (3.1, 9.6)‡

1.1 (0.7, 1.9)‡

0.22 (0.13, 0.39)§§

0.0014

Yes

Control

4.6 (2.5–8.7)‡

3.9 (2.3–6.7)‡

0.78 (0.45, 1.33)§§

Blood eosinophils (10 9 /L)

Gonem 2016 [20]

Intervention

0.29 (95.03)#

0.29 (0.23–0.36)‡

1.01 (0.79, 1.28)§§

0.44

No

Control

0.28 (80.63)#

0.32 (0.25, 0.41)‡

1.13 (0.89, 1.43)§§

Kuna (trial 1) 2016 [21]

Intervention

NM

NM

NM

NM

No

Control

NM

NM

NM

Diamant 2014 [24]

Intervention

NM

NM

NM

NM

No

Control

NM

NM

NM

FeNO (ppb)

Singh 2013 [13]

Intervention

33.9 (22.4)*

26.3 (23.7)*

NM

NM

No

Control

39.3 (23.9)*

23.3 (22.8)*

NM

Bateman 2017 [16]

Intervention

NM

NM

NM

> 0.05

No

NM

NM

NM

> 0.05

NM

NM

NM

> 0.05

Control

NM

NM

NM

–

Busse 2013 [17]

Intervention

31.9 (21.4)*

NM

0.221

> 0.05

No

30.9 (30.5)*

NM

2.368

> 0.05

28.3 (23.2)*

NM

−0.080

> 0.05

33.5 (31.6)*

NM

1.333

> 0.05

Control

28.1 (22.0)*

NM

−7.000

–

Gonem 2016 [20]

Intervention

37.72 (4.75)†

34.88 (3.97)†

−5.82 (−13.79, 2.16)**

0.49

No

Control

43.67 (6.97)†

38.48 (4.32)†

−2.21 (−10.90, 6.48)**

Kuna (trial 1) 2016 [21]

Intervention

NM

NM

NM

NM

No

Control

NM

NM

NM

Diamant 2014 [24]

Intervention

51.6 (38.5)*

NM

NM

NM

No

Control

71.0 (36.5)*

NM

NM

Methacholine PC 20 (mg/mL)

Singh 2013 [13]

Intervention

1.48 (3.2)*

0.31*

NM

NM

No

Control

1.48 (3.2)*

0.39*

Diamant 2014 [24]

Intervention

0.91 (2.21)††

0.97 (1.98)††

NM

0.038

Yes

Control

1.00 (2.19)††

0.49 (2.19)††

  1. Methacholine PC20, the provocation concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1; NM, not mentioned