Mirabegron as adjuvant treatment for patients with interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) patients represent a heterogeneous group with pain and urinary storage symptoms and varying responses to current treatment options. The novel beta-3 agonist, mirabegron, has been shown to improve storage symptoms of patients with bladder overactivity; however, its effect on symptoms in the IC/BPS population has yet to be studied. METHODS: Patients diagnosed at a single IC centre with IC/BPS undergoing standard therapy were treated with additional daily mirabegron 25 mg and seen in followup post-treatment. Patients completed the Interstitial Cystitis Symptom Index and Problem Index (ICSI/ICPI), and the Pelvic Pain and Urgency/Frequency Patient Symptom Scale (PUF) prior to and following mirabegron treatment. Global (NRS) and symptom-specific outcomes were assessed by comparing the pre- and post-treatment mean scores using tailed-t test (p<0.05 considered statistically significant). RESULTS: A total of 23 patients were available for review pre- and post-mirabegron treatment. There was no significant difference in ICSI (p=0.448), ICPI (p=0.352), or PUF (p=0.869) pre- and post-treatment. Analysis of symptom-specific outcomes show statistically significant improvements in urgency (p=0.048); however, no statistically significant improvements in frequency (p=0.951) or pain (p=0.952) were observed with mirabegron therapy. CONCLUSIONS: IC/BPS patients treated with mirabegron had improvement of urinary urgency, but no significant benefit in terms of pain or urinary frequency. This data suggests that mirabegron's role in the IC/BPS patient should be that of adjuvant treatment to ameliorate urgency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".