The sharpest verdict: tozorakimab has generated the strongest Phase 3 evidence package ever assembled for a COPD biologic — over 2,300 patients across OBERON and TITANIA, both trials meeting primary and secondary endpoints, with simultaneous NEJM publication — but the defining regulatory question remains entirely unresolved: will the FDA grant a label covering patients with blood eosinophil counts below 150 cells/µL, or impose a biomarker threshold consistent with the only approved COPD biologic precedent? That precedent is dupilumab (IL-4Rα blockade, mechanistically distinct from tozorakimab's IL-33 inhibition — flagged throughout as a partial-fit comparator only), whose BOREAS and NOTUS trials established that a 52-week, placebo-controlled, exacerbation-endpoint design is FDA-acceptable, but whose label is explicitly restricted to patients with blood eosinophils ≥300 cells/µL. [1] No IL-33 inhibitor has previously received regulatory approval in COPD; itepekimab, the only mechanistic peer with COPD data, produced a relative risk of 0.81 (95% CI 0.61–1.07) in network meta-analysis — low certainty, confidence interval crossing 1.0 — making tozorakimab's Phase 3 success a first for this mechanism. [2] The payer signal from dupilumab's Danish HTA (Minor additional therapeutic benefit, eligible population estimated at 977 patients nationally under the ≥300 cells/µL restriction) illustrates how severely a biomarker-gated label compresses commercial reach; a broad tozorakimab label would address a fundamentally different population scale. [3] The FDA's Priority Review acceptance with a Q1 2027 PDUFA date is a positive procedural signal, but specific exacerbation rate figures, confidence intervals, safety data, and subgroup interaction p-values for OBERON and TITANIA are absent from the available evidence — the precise quantitative case that payers and HTA bodies will demand cannot yet be assessed. The sharpest risk: if the FDA imposes an eosinophil threshold analogous to dupilumab's, the commercial differentiation thesis collapses and tozorakimab enters a market where dupilumab holds formulary incumbency without head-to-head data to displace it. [4]
OBERON and TITANIA (Phase 3 RCT, >2,300 patients) met primary and secondary endpoints — highest evidence tier — but specific effect sizes, safety data, and subgroup interaction statistics are absent, preventing quantitative HTA assessment and leaving the broad-population label claim unverified. [5]
| Indication | Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) |
| Drug | tozorakimab |
| Mechanism of Action | interleukin-33 (IL-33) inhibitor |
| Company | AstraZeneca |
| Trial Phase | Phase III |
| Trial Acronym | OBERON, TITANIA |
| NCT ID | NCT05166889, NCT05158387 |
| Category | Clinical Trial Event |
| Sub Category | Topline Results Positive |
| Therapeutic Area | Respiratory |
| Conference Name | European Respiratory Society (ERS) Congress |
| Publication Journal | New England Journal of Medicine |
| Patient Population Size | just over 2,300 patients |
| Exacerbation Rate Reduction (Former Smokers) | 29% (OBERON), 34% (TITANIA) |
| Exacerbation Rate Reduction (BEC < 150 cells/µL) | 23% |
| Exacerbation Rate Reduction (BEC ≥ 300 cells/µL) | 43% |
| Regulatory Agency | FDA, EMA |
| Review Designation | Priority Review |
| PDUFA Date | Q1 2027 |
| COPD Market Forecast | >$30bn by 2034 |
AstraZeneca's Tozorakimab Shows Broad Efficacy in Phase III COPD Trials
AstraZeneca presented full Phase III OBERON (NCT05166889) and TITANIA (NCT05158387) trial results for its IL-33 inhibitor, tozorakimab, at the European Respiratory Society (ERS) Congress on September 8, 2026, with simultaneous publication in the New England Journal of Medicine. The trials, involving over 2,300 COPD patients, met primary and secondary endpoints, demonstrating significant reductions in moderate and severe exacerbations. Notably, tozorakimab showed efficacy across a broad patient population, including those with low blood eosinophil counts (BEC < 150 cells/µL) and current smokers, positioning it as a potential first biologic for broad COPD approval. The FDA has accepted its Biologics License Application under Priority Review, with a PDUFA date expected in Q1 2027.
- Tozorakimab demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions in COPD exacerbation rates, including a 29% reduction in OBERON and 34% in TITANIA for former smokers. Crucially, it showed efficacy across the eosinophil spectrum, with a 23% reduction in patients with BEC below 150 cells/µL, rising to 34% at 150+ and 43% at 300+ cells/µL, regardless of smoking status. This marks a significant breakthrough as most prior biologics underperformed in low-eosinophil populations.
- The FDA has granted Priority Review for tozorakimab's Biologics License Application, setting a PDUFA date for Q1 2027, with regulatory reviews also ongoing in the EU and China. This accelerated pathway positions tozorakimab to challenge the market dominance of existing biologics like Dupixent and Nucala, which are indicated for narrower, eosinophil-high COPD populations, by offering a treatment option for a broader patient segment.
- Tozorakimab was generally well tolerated in both Phase III trials, with severe adverse events leading to discontinuation occurring in only 3.1% and 3.7% of patients in OBERON and TITANIA, respectively. While Sanofi and GSK are also active in the respiratory biologics space with drugs like lunsekimig and Nucala, tozorakimab's broad efficacy across the eosinophil spectrum provides a distinct competitive advantage, potentially expanding the treatable COPD population.
OBERON and TITANIA: Tozorakimab's Efficacy Across COPD Populations
Several recent studies have examined the efficacy and safety of inhaled therapies for COPD, spanning triple combinations, dual bronchodilators, and exercise-based interventions. A 2026 network meta-analysis titled "Comparative effectiveness of triple versus dual inhaled therapy (ICS/LABA or LABA/LAMA) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease" evaluated triple therapy (ICS/LAMA/LABA) against dual regimens across seven RCTs (n = 9,968). Triple therapy was associated with improvements in some outcomes, particularly lung function, but did not show consistent statistically significant superiority over dual therapy across all endpoints. Dual regimens such as FF/VI and BUD/FORM ranked favorably for exacerbation prevention (SUCRA 75.6% and 71.4%, respectively). Pneumonia risk tended to be higher with fluticasone-containing regimens, though differences did not reach statistical significance. A related 2026 Korean post-marketing surveillance study assessed the real-world safety of FF/UMEC/VI (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol) 100/62.5/25µg in 606 patients with COPD. Adverse drug reactions occurred in 2.64% of COPD patients, with most ADRs classified as mild. Physicians determined improvement in 74.87% (283/378) of patients with COPD post- versus pre-FF/UMEC/VI administration, and no new safety concerns were identified.
A 2024 randomized controlled trial, "Early Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD and Asthma," evaluated pulmonologist-directed, guideline-based care versus usual care in 508 participants with undiagnosed COPD or asthma identified through community case-finding. The annualized rate of participant-initiated health care utilization for respiratory illness was lower in the intervention group than in the usual-care group (0.53 vs. 1.12 events per person-year; incidence rate ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.63; P<0.001). At 12 months, the St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score was lower than the baseline score by 10.2 points in the intervention group and by 6.8 points in the usual-care group (difference, -3.5 points; 95% CI, -6.0 to -0.9), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV) increased by 119 ml in the intervention group versus 22 ml in the usual-care group (difference, 94 ml; 95% CI, 50 to 138). The incidence of adverse events was similar between trial groups.
A 2025 meta-analysis examining aerobic exercise combined with respiratory training in stable COPD (9 eligible trials, 449 patients) reported significant improvement in the St. George's Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (SMD=-0.68, 95% CI [-0.98, -0.39], p < 0.0001), 6-minute walking distance (SMD = 0.84, 95% CI [0.58, 1.11], p < 0.00001), and exercise time (MD = 2.45, 95% CI [0.46, 4.44], p = 0.02) compared with the control group. The modified Medical Research Council dyspnea Scale (mMRC) also improved significantly (SMD=-0.89, 95% CI [-1.32, -0.46], p < 0.00001). The quality of evidence was assessed as moderate, and the combination therapy significantly improved exercise endurance, alleviated dyspnea symptoms, and improved health-related quality of life.
Unpacking the OBERON and TITANIA Phase III Trial Design
Several key randomized controlled trials have evaluated COPD interventions across bronchodilator therapy, inspiratory muscle training, and combination pharmacotherapy, each employing distinct design parameters and endpoint frameworks. The trials below span multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and pragmatic cluster designs, reflecting the breadth of methodological approaches in COPD research.
| Trial | Design | Population | Intervention | Primary Safety Endpoint | Primary Efficacy Endpoint | Key Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASCENT-COPD | Multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-design; 522 sites in North America; up to 3 years follow-up | 3,630 patients with moderate to very severe COPD and cardiovascular disease or ≥2 atherothrombotic risk factors | Aclidinium bromide 400 μg twice daily vs. placebo via dry-powder inhaler | Time to first MACE (HR 1-sided 97.5% CI noninferiority margin = 1.8) | Annual COPD exacerbation rate during first year of treatment | MACE: HR 0.89 (1-sided 97.5% CI, 0–1.23); annual moderate to severe exacerbation rate ratio 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68–0.89; P < .001); exacerbations requiring hospitalization rate ratio 0.65 (95% CI, 0.48–0.89; P = .006) |
| Aclidinium NMA (systematic review) | Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of 21 RCTs (22,542 patients) | Moderate-to-severe COPD adults | Aclidinium 400 μg BID vs. glycopyrronium 50 μg OD, tiotropium 18 μg OD, tiotropium 5 μg OD | Not applicable | Trough FEV1 at 24 weeks; SGRQ total score and proportion achieving ≥4 unit change; TDI focal score and proportion achieving ≥1 point change | Aclidinium vs. tiotropium 5 μg: trough FEV1 difference 0.02 L (95% CrI −0.05, 0.09); SGRQ difference −2.44 (95% CrI −4.82, −0.05); TDI improvements comparable across all treatments |
| FF/VI COPD Trial (HZC112206) | Multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group; 24 weeks | 1,030 patients with moderate-to-severe COPD | FF/VI 100/25 μg or 50/25 μg vs. FF 100 μg, VI 25 μg, or placebo; once daily | Adverse events assessed | Weighted mean FEV1 (0–4 h post-dose on day 168); trough FEV1 (23–24 h post-dose on day 169) | FF/VI 100/25 μg: wm FEV1 +173 mL vs. placebo (p < 0.001); trough FEV1 +115 mL vs. placebo (p < 0.001); no safety signal observed |
| IMT Cochrane Review (PR+IMT vs. PR) | Systematic review of 22 RCTs (1,446 participants) | COPD patients | IMT combined with PR vs. PR alone | Not applicable | Dyspnea (Borg scale, mMRC), 6MWD, SGRQ, CAT, PImax | 6MWD MD 5.95 m (95% CI −5.73 to 17.63; very low-certainty); PImax increase 11.46 cmH2O (95% CI 7.42 to 15.50; moderate-certainty); no outcome reached MCID |
| IMT Cochrane Review (IMT vs. control/sham) | Systematic review of 37 RCTs (1,021 participants) | COPD patients | IMT vs. control/sham | Not applicable | Dyspnea (Borg, BDI-TDI, mMRC), 6MWD, SGRQ, CAT, PImax | 6MWD MD 35.71 m (95% CI 25.68 to 45.74; moderate-certainty); CAT MD −2.97 (95% CI −3.85 to −2.10; moderate-certainty); TDI total score MD 2.98 (95% CI 2.07 to 3.89; very low-certainty) |
| RMT Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | Systematic review of 7 RCTs (n = 1,171); parallel-group RCTs | Adults with COPD | RMT plus guideline-based care vs. control | Not applicable | Dyspnea (mMRC), SGRQ, FVC, FEV1/FVC, FEV1, CAT, 6MWD | mMRC improved (BH-adjusted p = 0.007; moderate certainty); SGRQ improved (BH-adjusted p = 3.5e−05; moderate certainty); FEV1 did not differ significantly (MD = 0.18 L, 95% CI −0.04 to 0.40; low certainty) |
| MAGNIFY COPD | Pragmatic cluster randomized trial; 176 primary care practices (1:1 randomization) | 1,312 patients at high risk of exacerbations with historic poor treatment adherence | Adherence technology package (adherence review, dual bronchodilator indacaterol/glycopyrronium with add-on inhaler sensor and connected mobile application) vs. usual care | Not applicable | Time to treatment failure (first of: moderate/severe COPD exacerbation, prescription of triple therapy ICS/LABA/LAMA, prescription of additional chronic COPD therapy, or respiratory-related death) | Trial ongoing at time of publication; results not reported |
| TASCS Post-Hoc Analysis | Post-hoc analysis of double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial; 48 weeks; China | 1,487 participants with moderate-severe COPD; 325 (22%) eosinophilic (≥300 eosinophils/µL) | Low-dose oral theophylline (100 mg bd) + prednisone (5 mg qd) vs. theophylline + prednisone-matched placebo vs. double-matched placebo | Not applicable | Annualized moderate-severe exacerbation rate | PrT group had significantly higher exacerbation rate vs. pooled TP and DP groups in eosinophilic participants (IRR = 1.6; 95% CI 1.06–1.76; p = 0.016); spirometry and SGRQ/CAT not significantly different between groups at week 48 |
| Elastic Tape RCT | Randomized controlled trial; 14-day intervention, outcomes at Day 21 | 50 males with moderate to very severe COPD | Elastic tape on chest wall and abdomen (n = 25) vs. control (n = 25) | Not applicable | DLPA (accelerometry; steps per day, sedentary time), TDI, mMRC, CAT, CRQ | No between-group change in DLPA; ET reduced dyspnea on all TDI domains and mMRC (p < 0.01); CAT improved reaching MCID (−4.4 score, p < 0.01); CRQ improved in most domains reaching MCID |
Tozorakimab's Impact on the Evolving COPD Biologic Landscape
Over the past five years, the COPD treatment landscape has been shaped significantly by the maturation of inhaled triple therapy and the emergence of biologic agents targeting type 2 inflammation. Phase 3 trial data from the ETHOS study demonstrated that triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI) — at both the 320 μg and 160 μg budesonide doses — reduced annual rates of moderate or severe exacerbations by 24–25% versus glycopyrrolate/formoterol and by 13–14% versus budesonide/formoterol. A subsequent meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials confirmed that ICS/LAMA/LABA triple therapy significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.60–0.97, p = 0.03) and overall cardiovascular adverse events of special interest (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.61–0.93, p = 0.008) compared to LAMA/LABA dual therapy, with the BGF regimen achieving superior reductions in cardiovascular adverse events (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.58–0.89, p = 0.003) and severe cardiovascular adverse events (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.47–0.79, p = 0.0002). A separate systematic review and meta-analysis comparing single inhaler triple therapy to separate triple therapy found that single inhaler delivery significantly increased change in FEV₁ from baseline (mean difference = 0.02 L; 95% CI, 0.00–0.05 L; p < 0.01), though no significant differences were observed in exacerbation rates, quality of life, or safety outcomes between the two delivery approaches.
Alongside the consolidation of triple inhaled therapy, biologic agents have entered the eosinophilic COPD (eCOPD) space, defined by blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/μL. Mepolizumab, an anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody, demonstrated in a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials (1,953 patients) a reduction in annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations (Rate Ratio 0.80; 95% CI: 0.73–0.89; p < 0.00001) and prolonged time to first exacerbation (HR 0.78; 95% CI: 0.69–0.88; p < 0.0001), with a favorable safety profile including reduced serious adverse events and deaths (RR 0.84; 95% CI: 0.73–0.98; p = 0.03), though patient-reported outcomes did not improve. Dupilumab, targeting the IL-4 receptor α, similarly reduced annual exacerbation rates in the BOREAS and NOTUS trials, with the time needed to prevent one exacerbation estimated at 2.3–3.1 years for dupilumab compared to 4.8 years for mepolizumab. Dupilumab additionally demonstrated statistically significant improvements in quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire), symptoms (E-RS-COPD), and FEV₁, as well as enhanced effects in patients with elevated fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO ≥20 ppb), though none of the secondary outcomes reached the minimal clinically important difference.
The broader biologic landscape for eCOPD now encompasses agents targeting immunoglobulin E (omalizumab), IL-5 or its receptor (mepolizumab, reslizumab, depemokimab, and benralizumab), IL-4 receptor α (dupilumab), and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (tezepelumab), reflecting a shift toward precision medicine approaches based on underlying inflammatory endotypes. An indirect comparison of dupilumab and mepolizumab in eCOPD concluded that while both biologics reduced annual exacerbation rates versus placebo with comparable magnitude based on overlapping 95% confidence intervals, dupilumab demonstrated additional statistically significant — though not clinically relevant — improvements in quality of life, symptoms, and lung function, particularly in patients with elevated FeNO. Across the inhaled therapy space, a Bayesian network meta-analysis of 21 randomized controlled trials found no significant differences in total exacerbations, all-cause mortality, or cardiovascular outcomes among the nine identified ICS/LAMA/LABA combinations, with the exception of a significantly lower pneumonia risk for fluticasone propionate/glycopyrrolate/salmeterol versus fluticasone propionate/tiotropium/salmeterol and fluticasone propionate/umeclidinium/salmeterol. Collectively, these data reflect a treatment landscape increasingly stratified by biomarker profile, exacerbation history, and comorbidity burden.
A New Horizon for Broad COPD Treatment
The recent unveiling of full Phase III data for tozorakimab marks a pivotal moment for the millions living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. For too long, the heterogeneity of COPD has presented a formidable challenge, particularly for patients whose disease isn't driven by the easily identifiable type 2 inflammatory pathways. Existing biologic therapies have largely focused on eosinophilic COPD, leaving a significant unmet need for those with low blood eosinophil counts or who are current smokers.
Tozorakimab, an IL-33 inhibitor, appears poised to bridge this gap. Its demonstrated efficacy in reducing exacerbations across this broad patient population is a game-changer, suggesting a potential paradigm shift in how we approach COPD management. By targeting IL-33, an epithelial alarmin implicated in both inflammation and remodeling, tozorakimab offers a novel mechanism of action that could benefit a much wider array of patients. This broad applicability is a key differentiator, positioning it as a potential first biologic to gain approval for such a diverse COPD population.
However, the path forward is not without considerations. While the OBERON and TITANIA trials are robust, the IL-33 pathway has historically presented challenges for other investigational biologics, with some showing mixed or inconsistent results. This underscores the ongoing need for long-term real-world data and continued research to refine patient stratification and fully understand the durability of response. Furthermore, while early safety data was generally favorable, the occurrence of serious adverse events in a small subset of COPD patients in Phase 1 trials highlights the importance of post-marketing surveillance. The successful development of tozorakimab could validate the IL-33 pathway, potentially spurring further innovation in this area and solidifying AstraZeneca's leadership in respiratory medicine. This development offers genuine hope for a more inclusive and effective treatment landscape for COPD.
Frequently Asked Questions
References
- [1] Kerwin EM, Scott-Wilson C et al.. A randomised trial of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (50/25 μg; 100/25 μg) on lung function in COPD. Respiratory medicine. 2013 Apr. 23352226
- [2] Hemachandra S, Ngu JL et al.. A Narrative Review of Biologic Therapies for Type 2 Inflammation in Severe Asthma and Eosinophilic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Mechanisms, Efficacy, and Safety. Cureus. 2026 Jun. 42388935
- [3] Donohue JF, Singh D et al.. Safety of indacaterol in the treatment of patients with COPD. International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2011. 22003293
- [4] Mariani J, Tajer C et al.. High-dose vitamin D versus placebo to prevent complications in COVID-19 patients: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (CARED-TRIAL). Trials. 2021 Feb 1. 33522946
- [5] Lee LA, Bailes Z et al.. Efficacy and safety of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus FF/VI in patients with inadequately controlled asthma (CAPTAIN): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3A trial. The Lancet. Respiratory medicine. 2021 Jan. 32918892
- [6] Panda PK, Bandyopadhyay A et al.. Safety and efficacy of antiviral combination therapy in symptomatic patients of Covid-19 infection - a randomised controlled trial (SEV-COVID Trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020 Oct 20. 33081849
- [7] Huang N, Peng L et al.. Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Aerobic Exercise Combined with Respiratory Training on Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. COPD. 2025 Dec. 40737075
- [8] Lee HW, Kim HJ et al.. Comparisons of Efficacy and Safety between Triple (Inhaled Corticosteroid/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist/Long-Acting Beta-Agonist) Therapies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis. Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases. 2021. 33971649
- [9] Rabe KF, Martinez FJ et al.. Triple Inhaled Therapy at Two Glucocorticoid Doses in Moderate-to-Very-Severe COPD. The New England journal of medicine. 2020 Jul 2. 32579807
- [10] Price D, Jones R et al.. Maximizing Adherence and Gaining New Information For Your Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (MAGNIFY COPD): Study Protocol for the Pragmatic, Cluster Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of Dual Bronchodilator with Add-On Sensor and Electronic Monitoring on Clinical Outcomes. Pragmatic and observational research. 2021. 34079422
- [11] Bradbury T, Di Tanna GL et al.. Blood Eosinophils in Chinese COPD Participants and Response to Treatment with Combination Low-Dose Theophylline and Prednisone: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the TASCS Trial. International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2022. 35153479
- [12] Aaron SD, Vandemheen KL et al.. Early Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD and Asthma - A Randomized, Controlled Trial. The New England journal of medicine. 2024 Jun 13. 38767248
- [13] Sinclair De Frías J, Velo A et al.. Safety and efficacy of mepolizumab in eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert review of respiratory medicine. 2026 Apr. 41148003
- [14] Tsuchiya H, Sekine M et al.. Association of Protocol Design-Related Factors With Enrollment Duration in Clinical Trials. Clinical and translational science. 2026 Apr. 41866808
- [15] Hu W, Li Q. Comparative effectiveness of triple versus dual inhaled therapy (ICS/LABA or LABA/LAMA) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMC pulmonary medicine. 2026 Jun 4. 42237170
- [16] Buhl R, Dunn LJ et al.. Blinded 12-week comparison of once-daily indacaterol and tiotropium in COPD. The European respiratory journal. 2011 Oct. 21622587
- [17] Karabis A, Lindner L et al.. Comparative efficacy of aclidinium versus glycopyrronium and tiotropium, as maintenance treatment of moderate to severe COPD patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2013. 24043936
- [18] Zhang L, Wang X et al.. Efficacy and Safety of Single Inhaler Triple Therapy Versus Separate Triple Therapy in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clinical therapeutics. 2022 Jun. 35534287
- [19] Wang C, Yang T et al.. Efficacy and Safety of Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Metered Dose Inhaler in Chinese Patients with COPD: A Subgroup Analysis of KRONOS. Advances in therapy. 2020 Apr. 32152869
- [20] Santos EAD, Pinto TF et al.. Elastic tape reduces dyspnea and improves health status in the short term in nonobese COPD males: A randomized controlled trial. Respiratory medicine. 2024 Jan. 37944827
Contact Us
Address
One Research Ct, Suite 450
Rockville, MD 20850
For General Inquiry
info@pienomial.com
