MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093173165 · doi:10.1185/03007995.2013.784191

Comparison of safety outcomes among Caucasian, Hispanic, Black, and Asian patients in duloxetine studies of chronic painful conditions

2013· article· en· W2093173165 on OpenAlexaff
Paula J. Gaynor, Peng Liu, Mary A. Weller, Madelaine M. Wohlreich

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsinVentiv Health Clinical
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDuloxetinePlaceboAdverse effectInternal medicineDiscontinuationNauseaSubgroup analysisPhysical therapyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This post-hoc analysis was conducted to investigate if safety outcomes differed among race/ethnic subgroups of patients treated with duloxetine for chronic painful conditions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pooled data from 15 placebo-controlled clinical trials were used to compare the safety outcomes of duloxetine among patients of Caucasian, Hispanic, Asian, and Black race/ethnic origins. Patients were randomized to receive placebo (n = 2199) or duloxetine (n = 3148) for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis pain, or chronic low back pain. For categorical outcomes such as study discontinuation, adverse events leading to discontinuation, and treatment-emergent adverse events, incidence rates were summarized by race/ethnic subgroups. The Breslow-Day test was used to assess the homogeneity of treatment odds ratios across the four subgroups. For continuous outcomes such as changes in vital signs, body weight, and laboratory measures, an analysis of covariance or analysis of variance model was used and duloxetine effects were compared among race/ethnic subgroups based on the test of treatment-by-subgroup interaction. RESULTS: No significant differences were found among race/ethnic subgroups for discontinuation due to adverse events except for anxiety (p = 0.040). Rates of nausea and decreased appetite were significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) in duloxetine-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients within each race/ethnic subgroup. The Breslow-Day test was not significant for most safety outcomes, nor were treatment-by-race/ethnic subgroup interactions (p > 0.1), which suggested duloxetine effects were not significantly different among race/ethnic subgroups. CONCLUSION: Overall, these results detected only minimal differences among safety outcomes assessed in these race/ethnic subgroups in patients treated with duloxetine for chronic painful conditions. The unbalanced sample sizes among the race/ethnic subgroups may have limited the power to detect treatment by race subgroup interactions. These post-hoc subgroup analyses were of an exploratory nature and the results should be interpreted with appropriate caution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207