A phase 2a randomized controlled study to evaluate the pharmacokinetic, safety, tolerability and clinical effect of topically applied Umeclidinium in subjects with primary axillary hyperhidrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hyperhidrosis is a common medical condition which can have a significant impact on quality of life. Umeclidinium (UMEC) is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) developed as a dermal formulation. OBJECTIVES: This 2-week, double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled study evaluated systemic exposure, safety and tolerability of topically administered UMEC in subjects with primary axillary hyperhidrosis. Clinical effect was a secondary objective, measured by gravimetry and the hyperhidrosis disease severity scale (HDSS). Vehicle was included to evaluate safety. METHODS: Twenty-three subjects were randomized to either 1.85% UMEC (N = 18) or vehicle (N = 5) once daily. RESULTS: Measurable plasma concentrations were observed in 78% of subjects after the treatment. Nine subjects (50%) on UMEC and two subjects (40%) on vehicle reported AEs, most commonly application site reactions. At Day 15, seven subjects (41%) in UMEC and two subjects (40%) in vehicle had at least a 50% reduction in sweat production. Eight subjects (47%) in UMEC and one subject (20%) in vehicle had at least a two-point reduction in HDSS. No comparisons of treatment arms were planned prospectively. CONCLUSIONS: The measurable exposure, acceptable safety and preliminary clinical activity observed in this proof-of-concept study suggest the potential clinical utility of topical UMEC in subjects with axillary hyperhidrosis.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".