***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We found no RCTs comparing ICS and LABA combination with either placebo or usual care. We included one RCT that compared combined ICS and LABA with high-dose ICS in 40 adults with non-CF bronchiectasis without co-existent asthma. All participants received three months of high-dose budesonide dipropionate treatment (1600 micrograms). After three months, participants were randomly assigned to receive either high-dose budesonide dipropionate (1600 micrograms per day) or a combination of budesonide with formoterol (640 micrograms of budesonide and 18 micrograms of formoterol) for three months. The study was not blinded. We assessed it to be an RCT with overall high risk of bias. Data analysed in this review showed that those who received combined ICS-LABA (in stable state) had a significantly better transition dyspnoea index (mean difference (MD) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 2.18) and cough-free days (MD 12.30, 95% CI 2.38 to 22.2) compared with those receiving ICS after three months of treatment. No significant difference was noted between groups in quality of life (MD -4.57, 95% CI -12.38 to 3.24), number of hospitalisations (odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.79) or lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC)). Investigators reported 37 adverse events in the ICS group versus 12 events in the ICS-LABA group but did not mention the number of individuals experiencing adverse events. Hence differences between groups were not included in the analyses. We assessed the overall evidence to be low quality. In adults with bronchiectasis without co-existent asthma, during stable state, a small single trial with a high risk of bias suggests that combined ICS-LABA may improve dyspnoea and increase cough-free days in comparison with high-dose ICS. No data are provided for or against, the use of combined ICS-LABA in adults with bronchiectasis during an acute exacerbation, or in children with bronchiectasis in a stable or acute state. The absence of high quality evidence means that decisions to use or discontinue combined ICS-LABA in people with bronchiectasis may need to take account of the presence or absence of co-existing airway hyper-responsiveness and consideration of adverse events associated with combined ICS-LABA.
Output:

Key results: A single study showed some benefit of the inhaled ICS-LABA combination over high-dose ICS in terms of indices of clinical stability such as dyspnoea (shortness of breath), cough-free days and number of exacerbations but failed to show significant improvement in lung function or microbiology. No data are available on children with bronchiectasis or adults with bronchiectasis during an exacerbation phase. Until further evidence becomes available, we recommend that use of combined ICS-LABA should be individualised according to the presence or likelihood of co-existing asthma features and risks of medications. Quality of the evidence: This review is based on a single study, hence the quality of evidence is substantially limited. Bottom line: The decision to use combined ICS-LABA in bronchiectasis must be made for individual patients on the basis of the presence or absence of bronchial hyperreactivity, until further randomised controlled trials are conducted to answer this important question.