MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of Tadalafil in Men with Erectile Dysfunction Naïve to Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitor Therapy Compared with Prior Responders to Sildenafil Citrate

2006· article· en· W2108797351 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory A. Broderick, Craig F. Donatucci, Dimitrios Hatzichristou, Luiz Otávio Torres, Luc Valiquette, Yanli Zhao, Kate Loughney, Gregory D. Sides, Sanjeev Ahuja

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTadalafilSildenafilErectile dysfunctioncGMP-specific phosphodiesterase type 5MedicineUrologyPhosphodiesterase inhibitorPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Tadalafil, an inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5), is indicated for treatment of erectile dysfunction. Most tadalafil clinical trials excluded patients with unsuccessful prior treatment with sildenafil citrate (sildenafil). AIM: This retrospective analysis of pooled data from 14 tadalafil clinical trials examines the effect of this exclusion by comparing efficacy results in 1,349 patients without prior sildenafil use (naïve, presumably a mixture of potential responders and nonresponders) with efficacy results in 1,440 patients previously responsive to sildenafil (prior responders). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy measures included the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) erectile function (EF) domain, overall satisfaction (OS), and intercourse satisfaction (IS) domain scores; Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diary questions 2 through 5 (SEP2 [successful penetration], SEP3 [successful intercourse], SEP4 (satisfaction with hardness of erection), and SEP5 [overall satisfaction with the sexual experience]); and a Global Assessment Question (GAQ1) (13/14 trials) about erection improvement. Efficacy was compared using analysis of covariance (IIEF and SEP) and logistic regression (GAQ1) models. METHODS: After a 4-week, treatment-free, run-in period, patients in 14 double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials were treated with tadalafil 10 mg, tadalafil 20 mg, or placebo for 12 weeks (dosed as needed before sexual activity, no more than once daily). RESULTS: Tadalafil improved erectile function compared with placebo (P < 0.001) in naïve patients and sildenafil prior responders for all efficacy measures. For most efficacy outcomes, responses in the naïve group (probable mix of responders and nonresponders) were not statistically different from responses in the prior-responder group (P >or= 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The similar responses of these two patient groups observed in this post hoc analysis suggest, but do not confirm, that exclusion of sildenafil nonresponders in previously reported tadalafil clinical trials may not have substantially affected efficacy outcomes. Tadalafil improved erectile function in patients naïve to PDE5 inhibitor therapy and in patients who previously responded to sildenafil therapy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations14
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207