Ciprofloxacin or Tamsulosin in Men with Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) in men is principally defined by pain in the pelvic region lasting more than 3 months. No cause of the disease has been established, and therapies are empirical and mostly untested. Antimicrobial agents and alpha-adrenergic receptor blockers are frequently used. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 6-week therapy with ciprofloxacin or tamsulosin is more effective than placebo at improving symptoms in men with refractory, long-standing CP/CPPS. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design comparing 6 weeks of therapy with ciprofloxacin, tamsulosin, both drugs, or placebo. SETTING: Urology outpatient clinics at 10 tertiary care medical centers in North America. PATIENTS: Patients were identified from referral-based practices of urologists. One hundred ninety-six men with a National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score of at least 15 and a mean of 6.2 years of symptoms were enrolled. Patients had received substantial previous treatment. MEASUREMENTS: The authors evaluated NIH-CPSI total score and subscores, patient-reported global response assessment, a generic measure of quality of life, and adverse events. INTERVENTIONS: Ciprofloxacin, 500 mg twice daily; tamsulosin, 0.4 mg once daily; a combination of the 2 drugs; or placebo. RESULTS: The NIH-CPSI total score decreased modestly in all treatment groups. No statistically significant difference in the primary outcome was seen for ciprofloxacin versus no ciprofloxacin (P = 0.15) or tamsulosin versus no tamsulosin (P > 0.2). Treatments also did not differ significantly for any of the secondary outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Treatment lasting longer than 6 weeks was not tested. Patients who had received less pretreatment may have responded differently. CONCLUSION: Ciprofloxacin and tamsulosin did not substantially reduce symptoms in men with long-standing CP/CPPS who had at least moderate symptoms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".