Pneumonia Risk with Inhaled Fluticasone Furoate and Vilanterol Compared with Vilanterol Alone in Patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Radiographically confirmed pneumonia risk with inhaled corticosteroid use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been assessed to date. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of pneumonia, risk factors, and clinical attributes with inhaled fluticasone furoate (FF) in patients with COPD with an exacerbation history. METHODS: Two replicate, 1-year, double-blind clinical trials enrolled subjects with COPD with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and at least one exacerbation within the prior year. Subjects were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive inhaled once-daily vilanterol (VI) 25 μg or VI 25 μg combined with 50, 100, or 200 μg FF. Subjects were required to have a chest radiograph at screening and within 48 hours of any suspected pneumonia or exacerbation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 3,255 randomized subjects, 205 pneumonia events occurred in 181 subjects. Chest imaging was available for 195 (95%) of these events. Chest radiographs were also obtained for 1,793 (70%) of the 2,545 moderate and severe exacerbations. For VI alone and the combination with 50, 100, or 200 μg FF, reported pneumonia incidence was 3, 6, 6, and 7%, respectively. However, for events with compatible parenchymal infiltrates, the respective incidences were 2, 4, 4, and 5%. Factors associated with at least a twofold increase in the risk of pneumonia with FF/VI treatment were being a current smoker, having prior pneumonia, body mass index <25 kg/m(2), and severe airflow limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Radiographically confirmed pneumonia risk is increased with inhaled FF/VI, although at less than investigator-defined rates. Modifiable pneumonia risk factors should be considered when attempting to optimize COPD management. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01009463 [HZC102871]; NCT01017952 [HZC102970]).
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".