MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149370197 · doi:10.1111/bju.12733

Treatment satisfaction with tadalafil or tamsulosin vs placebo in men with lower urinary tract symptoms ( <scp>LUTS</scp> ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( <scp>BPH</scp> ): results from a randomised, placebo‐controlled study

2014· article· en· W2149370197 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Oelke, François Giuliano, Simin Baygani, Thomas Melby, Angelina Sontag

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsinVentiv Health Clinical
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTadalafilTamsulosinLower urinary tract symptomsPlaceboMedicineInternational Prostate Symptom ScoreUrologyBenign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)Erectile dysfunctionInternal medicineProstateHyperplasia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To assess treatment satisfaction with tadalafil or tamsulosin vs placebo in a 12-week, randomised, double-blind study of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: After a 4-week placebo lead-in period, men aged ≥45 years with an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of ≥13 and a maximum urinary flow rate of ≥4 to ≤15 mL/s received placebo (172 men), tadalafil 5 mg (171), or tamsulosin 0.4 mg (168) once daily for 12 weeks. Treatment Satisfaction Scale-BPH (TSS-BPH) responses were assessed based on median treatment differences using the van Elteren test. RESULTS: Overall treatment satisfaction was greater for tadalafil vs placebo (P = 0.005), based on greater satisfaction with efficacy (P = 0.003); neither overall treatment satisfaction nor satisfaction with efficacy was greater for tamsulosin vs placebo (P ≥ 0.409). For individual questions, 66.5% of men rated tadalafil treatment as 'effective/very effective' (Question 1, Q1) vs placebo (P = 0.011), 72.6% would 'definitely/probably recommend their treatment' (Q3; P = 0.043), 71.8% were generally 'very satisfied/satisfied with their medication' (Q8; P < 0.003), and 65.0% would 'definitely/probably continue therapy' (Q10; P = 0.035). With tamsulosin, differences vs placebo were not statistically significant. Subgroup analyses of overall TSS-BPH by baseline age (≤65/>65 years), history of erectile dysfunction (yes/no), LUTS/BPH severity (IPSS</≥20), total testosterone level (<300/≥300 ng/dL), and age-specific predicted prostate volume (<40/≥40 mL) showed no statistically significant treatment-subgroup interactions. Men with recent prior α-blocker therapy reported greater treatment satisfaction with tadalafil vs placebo, with only borderline difference for men without prior therapy. CONCLUSION: Treatment satisfaction was greater with tadalafil vs placebo, with no significant difference between tamsulosin and placebo.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207