Efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate 100 μg once-daily in patients with persistent asthma: A 24-week placebo and active-controlled randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) improve asthma disease control; once-daily ICS administration may have advantages for patients. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel ICS fluticasone furoate (FF) over 24 weeks versus placebo. This was a 24-week double-blind, double-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled study (NCT01159912) of 343 asthma patients (≥12 years) not controlled by their current ICS. Patients were randomised (1:1:1) to FF100 μg, placebo (both administered once-daily [OD] via ELLIPTA™ dry powder inhaler in the evening) or fluticasone propionate (FP) 250 μg (administered twice-daily (BD) via DISKUS™/ACCUHALER™). Primary endpoint was change from baseline in pre-dose evening forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) at Week 24; change from baseline in % rescue-free 24-h periods was a powered secondary endpoint. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed. FF100 μg OD and FP250 μg BD significantly improved pre-dose evening FEV1 compared with placebo at Week 24 (+146 ml [p = 0.009] and +145 ml [p = 0.011], respectively). Percentage of rescue-free 24-h periods was increased with FF100 μg OD (+14.8%) and FP250 μg BD (+17.9%) compared to placebo (both p < 0.001). On-treatment AEs were reported by 53% (FF100 μg OD), 42% (FP250 μg BD) and 40% (placebo) of patients. On-treatment severe asthma exacerbations were lower with FF100 μg OD (3%) and FP250 μg BD (2%) than placebo (7%). There was significant suppression of urinary cortisol at week 24 with FF100 μg OD (p = 0.030) and FP250 μg BD (p = 0.036) relative to placebo. FF100 μg OD, administered in the evening, achieves significant improvements in lung function and rescue inhaler use over 24 weeks, comparable to FP250 μg BD with similar safety profile.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".