Prolonged efficacy of the 300IR 5‐grass pollen tablet up to 2 years after treatment cessation, as measured by a recommended daily combined score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 300IR (index of reactivity) 5-grass pollen tablet has favorable short-term and sustained clinical efficacy in patients with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). Here, we report maintenance of efficacy and safety over 2 years following treatment discontinuation. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter Phase 3 trial in patients aged 18-50 years with ARC. During study years 1-3, patients received a daily sublingual tablet containing either 300IR 5-grass pollen extract or placebo, according to a discontinuous pre- and coseasonal protocol. Study years 4 and 5 were treatment-free. In response to health authorities' recommendations, the daily combined score (DCS) was assessed in a post-hoc analysis as the efficacy endpoint. Components of the DCS were daily rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (DRTSS) and daily rescue medication score (DRMS). RESULTS: 633 patients with ARC were randomized to placebo (n = 219) or 300IR 5-grass pollen tablet, beginning 4 months (4 M, n = 207) or 2 months (2 M, n = 207) prior to the estimated start of the grass pollen season and continuing until season's end. During the first post-treatment year, a statistically significant difference versus placebo in least squares (LS) mean DCS was noted in patients previously receiving active treatment (300IR (2 M) point estimate: -0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI95%): [-0.26, -0.06], p = 0.0019; -31.1%; 300IR (4 M) point estimate: -0.13, CI95%: [-0.23, -0.03], p = 0.0103, -25.3%). During the second post-treatment year, patients in the 300IR (4 M) group, but not the 300IR (2 M) group, showed a statistically significant difference in LS mean DCS versus placebo (point estimate: -0.11, CI95%: [-0.21; 0.00], p = 0.0478, -28.1%). This significant efficacy seen during the post-treatment years in patients previously treated with 5-grass pollen tablet compared favorably with that during the 3 prior years of active treatment. A statistically significant difference versus placebo was also noted in secondary efficacy measures in both post-treatment years (except for DRTSS in year 5). In the absence of any active treatment, the safety profile was similar in the active groups versus placebo group during either post-treatment year. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with grass pollen-associated ARC, 5-grass pollen tablet therapy beginning 4 months before the pollen season and continuing to season's end demonstrated efficacy across all variables during active treatment, and this effect was prolonged for up to 2 years post-treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00418379.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".