MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Mepolizumab in Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Multi-center, Open-label, Phase IIIb Study

2016· article· en· W2515998798 on OpenAlexaff
Njira Lugogo, Christian Domingo, Pascal Chanez, Richard Leigh, M Gilson, Robert G. Price, Steven W. Yancey, Héctor Ortega

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Therapeutics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesGenentechGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMepolizumabMedicineAsthmaTerm (time)Open labelAdverse effectInternal medicineEosinophil

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma often experience recurrent asthma exacerbations despite intensive inhaled corticosteroid therapy. In 2 previous double-blind studies (MENSA [NCT01691521] and SIRIUS [NCT01691508]), treatment with intravenous or subcutaneous mepolizumab was associated with significantly reduced annualized exacerbation rates and oral corticosteroid (OCS) requirements compared with placebo. The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of subcutaneous mepolizumab treatment in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. METHODS: COSMOS was a 52-week, open-label extension study in patients who received mepolizumab or placebo in MENSA or SIRIUS. Patients received subcutaneous mepolizumab regardless of prior treatment allocation and continued to receive appropriate standard-of-care asthma therapy throughout. The primary objective was to assess the long-term safety of mepolizumab; end points included adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs). Efficacy assessments included the annualized exacerbation rate and durability of response (defined as the exacerbation rate and OCS dose reduction when combined with MENSA and SIRIUS data, respectively). FINDINGS: In total, 558 (86%; previous mepolizumab: 358; previous placebo: 200) and 94 (14%; previous mepolizumab: 58, previous placebo: 36) patients experienced on-treatment AEs and SAEs, respectively. No fatal AEs were reported. Totals of 13 (2%) and 29 (4%) patients experienced systemic and local site reactions, respectively. There were no reports of mepolizumab-related anaphylaxis. Mepolizumab treatment was shown to exert a durable response, with patients who previously received mepolizumab in MENSA or SIRIUS maintaining reductions in exacerbation rate and OCS dosing throughout COSMOS. Patients who previously received placebo in MENSA or SIRIUS demonstrated improvements in these end points following treatment with mepolizumab in COSMOS. IMPLICATIONS: These data demonstrate a favorable safety profile of mepolizumab and indicate a durable and stable effect over time, supporting long-term treatment in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01842607.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations278
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TherapeuticsSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207