Swiss Experience in Therapy With Dual Bronchodilation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Relation to Self-Reported Physical Functionality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Medical therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) usually includes inhaled dual bronchodilation leading not only to an improvement in symptoms but also to an increase in physical performance. However, it remains unknown whether responder rates to dual bronchodilation differ between the Swiss subgroup in comparison to participants of other European countries. METHODS: The non-interventional OTIVACTO trial investigated changes in self-reported physical functioning in COPD patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg fixed dose combination for 6 weeks. The cut-off between responder and non-responder was defined as a minimum increase of 10 points using the 10-question physical functioning questionnaire (PF-10) score. We searched for patterns of the responder patient group and compared the results of the whole dataset with the subgroup of Swiss participants. RESULTS: Compared to the total cohort (n = 7,608), the Swiss participants (n = 94) were predominantly > 65 years of age and had significantly more comorbidities. There were no significant differences according to COPD stage, smoking status, exacerbation rate in the last 12 months and modified Medical Research Council questionnaire (mMRC) score between the total cohort and the Swiss collective. There were no significant differences between the Swiss subgroup and the total cohort with regard to response to the medication in the PF-10 score. In the intragroup comparison, patients with high mMRC score showed significantly higher values in the PF-10 in both groups. The number of exacerbations had no influence on the PF-10 score in the Swiss subgroup but in the total cohort. CONCLUSION: In terms of age and number of comorbidities, significant differences were found between the overall patient population and the Swiss participants, having no influence on the success of the medication. The patients suffering from increased dyspnea benefited most from tiotropium/olodaterol treatment (Clinical Trials Registry NCT02720757).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".