Efficacy and safety of on‐demand tadalafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in South‐East Asian men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Tadalafil is an inhibitor of phosphodiesterase type 5 used for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED). The efficacy and safety of tadalafil have been evaluated extensively in Western populations. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of on-demand tadalafil for the treatment of ED in South-East Asian men. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of men with mild to severe ED of various etiologies randomized to receive placebo (n = 122), tadalafil 10 mg (n = 120), or tadalafil 20 mg (n = 125), taken as needed (maximum once daily) for 12 weeks. Efficacy assessments included the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diary, and a Global Assessment Question (GAQ). RESULTS: Men from China, Singapore, and the Philippines participated in this trial (n = 367). Compared with placebo, tadalafil significantly improved erectile dysfunction on all efficacy outcomes (P < 0.001). Patients receiving tadalafil 10 mg and 20 mg experienced a significant mean improvement of 8.1 and 8.7, respectively, in the IIEF Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain score from baseline (vs placebo 2.4, P < 0.001). In patients receiving tadalafil 10 mg and 20 mg, the mean per-patient success rate for intercourse attempts (SEP3) was 62% and 70%, respectively, compared with 32% for the placebo group (P < 0.001). Of patients who received tadalafil 10 mg and 20 mg, 81% and 86% reported improved erections at endpoint (GAQ) compared with 44% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). The most common adverse events reported by patients were headache, back pain, dyspepsia, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for South-East Asian men with ED.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".