The influence of age on treatment outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction treated with two regimens of tadalafil: results of the SURE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patterns of sexual activity and efficacy over time to two dosing regimens of tadalafil differ with ageing in men with erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The SURE study was a multicentre, crossover, open-label study. In all, 4262 men with ED were randomly assigned to treatment with tadalafil 20 mg on-demand before sexual activity, or three times per week for 5-6 weeks. After a 1-week washout period, patients were crossed over to the alternative regimen for 5-6 weeks. This post hoc analysis evaluated the pattern of sexual attempts, efficacy and safety of these two regimens of tadalafil across several age groups. RESULTS: The mean number of sexual attempts per week decreased from a range of 2.6-2.8 at age < or = 40 years to 1.9 at age >70 years. Age did not significantly influence the time of sexual activity after dosing. A high percentage of attempts occurred >4 h after dosing for all age groups ( approximately 70% for men taking tadalafil three times per week and approximately 50% for men taking tadalafil on-demand). For all age groups, most attempts took place in the late evening. The mean per-patient rate of successful attempts was similar for each interval up to 36 h after dosing and decreased with increasing age (> or =75% at age < or = 60 years, > or = 68% at age >60 to < or = 70 years, and > or = 60% at age >70 years). Tadalafil was well tolerated at all ages. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of sexual activity with tadalafil 20 mg, taken on-demand or three times per week, were similar in the different age groups. Tadalafil was effective up to 36 h after dosing for all age groups.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".