MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970222615 · doi:10.1089/jamp.2011.0913

Introduction to the Canadian Scientific Advisory Committee on Respiratory and Allergy Therapies: <i>In Vivo</i> Evaluation For Clinical Testing in COPD and Asthma Therapy Using Generics

2011· review· en· W1970222615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Irvin Mayers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineCOPDAsthmaPlaceboAdvisory committeePopulationClinical endpointClinical trialAllergyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineAlternative medicinePathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health Canada posted a guidance for in vivo testing of subsequent market entry (SME) inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for treatment of asthma and published proceedings regarding SME products for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This manuscript reviews these recommendations and outlines their rationale. METHODS: The Scientific Advisory Committee on Respiratory and Allergy Therapies (SAC-RAT) met between 2007 and 2009. The committee reviewed approval processes for SME ICS for asthma treatment and a draft guidance was posted by Health Canada. SAC-RAT also reviewed SME long-acting beta agonists (LABA) and fixed drug dose combinations (FDDC) for COPD treatment. RESULTS: SAC-RAT concluded that measuring airway eosinophils in mild, stable, steroid-naive, subjects was reproducible and measurable. Study duration could be reduced to only 3 weeks using this inflammatory outcome to establish therapeutic equivalence between SME ICS and Canadian reference product. A placebo limb of the trial was added to establish biological activity of the products. The committee recommended that LABA SME products be tested in a clinically stable, representative population with GOLD stage 2 and/or 3 COPD. There was not agreement regarding the extent of allowed FEV(1) reversibility in this population. The FEV(1) area under the curve (AUC) was recommended as a primary endpoint. For equivalence, both AUC and the shape of the curve (assessed by the peak and trough) over a 12-h period should be different from placebo but similar for the SME and reference products. Secondary endpoints were not recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical presentations of asthma and COPD may overlap but prespecified disease phenotypes can separate the populations. ICS therapeutic equivalence can be assessed by reduction in eosinophil counts tested in steroid naive subjects. Increases in FEV(1) define LABA effects in moderate to severe COPD. When designing trials to assess therapeutic equivalence, the anticipated mechanism of action of the drug should be used to determine outcome measures.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug DeliverySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207