Long-term efficacy and tolerability of pentosan polysulphate sodium in the treatment of bladder pain syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to report on the long-term efficacy and tolerability of pentosan polysulphate sodium (PPS) in patients with bladder pain syndrome (BPS). The secondary objective is to find the predictors of the long-term outcome. METHODS: This is a single institution, retrospective study. The study period was from 1994 to 2008. All patients fulfilled the clinical criteria of BPS, as suggested by European Society for the Study of Interstitial Cystitis. We included only patients with de novo BPS diagnosis and no previous PPS or other treatment. The efficacy of PPS was measured with the global response assessment scale (GRA). Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on the duration of the treatment. Group 1 took the drug for less than 12 months. Group 2 took the drug for more than 12 months. RESULTS: There were 271 patients eligible for the study. Most of the patients were female (90%), with the mean age at presentation of 45.5 years. The average duration of symptoms was 28.5 months. The mean follow-up was 22 months (range 3-130). Out of all the patients, 147 patients (54.2%) reported over 50% improvement using the GRA. The reported efficacy was higher in Group 2 (60%). Ninety-three patients (34.3%) decided to stop taking the medication for various reasons. The most common reasons to stop the medication were poor outcome (16.6% of patients) and side effects (11.1% of patients). Poor outcome was associated with nocturia, smoking and detrusor overactivity. Good outcome was associated with longer PPS intake (>12 months) and severe cystoscopic findings of glomerulation. CONCLUSION: Pentosan polysulphate sodium is an effective oral therapy to control the symptoms of BPS with good long-term efficacy and tolerability.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".