Clinical trial: factors associated with resolution of heartburn in patients with reflux oesophagitis – results from the EXPO study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ability to predict symptom response to reflux oesophagitis-healing therapy may optimize treatment decisions. AIM: To identify factors associated with heartburn resolution in patients receiving acid-suppressive therapy for reflux oesophagitis. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomized, double-blind trial (EXPO; AstraZeneca study code: SH-NEG-0008), patients with endoscopically confirmed reflux oesophagitis and reflux symptoms received once-daily proton pump inhibitor therapy [esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 1562) or pantoprazole 40 mg (n = 1589)] for >or=4 weeks. Factors associated with heartburn resolution after 4 weeks were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Esomeprazole therapy, positive Helicobacter pylori status and greater age were associated with an increased likelihood of heartburn resolution [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.31 (1.12, 1.54), 1.44 (1.19, 1.74) and 1.013 (1.007, 1.019) per year, respectively; all P < 0.001]. Men and patients with no acid regurgitation or epigastric pain pre-treatment were also more likely to achieve heartburn resolution (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of esomeprazole rather than pantoprazole increases the probability of achieving resolution of heartburn during reflux oesophagitis-healing therapy. Other factors, including H. pylori status, age, gender and symptom profile may be helpful in determining the likelihood of heartburn resolution in such patients.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".