A detailed analysis of possible efficacy signals of NTHi-Mcat vaccine against severe COPD exacerbations in a previously reported randomised phase 2b trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An investigational vaccine containing non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae (NTHi) and Moraxella catarrhalis (Mcat) surface proteins did not show vaccine efficacy (VE) against combined moderate and severe (moderate/severe) exacerbations in a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Nevertheless, observations on rates of severe exacerbations and hospitalisations encouraged further evaluation. METHODS: Patients with stable COPD (moderate to very severe airflow limitation, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage 2-4), 40-80 years and at least one moderate/severe exacerbation in the last year received two doses of NTHi-Mcat vaccine or placebo plus standard care. Secondary analyses were conducted on VE against exacerbations according to severity. Potential predictive factors at baseline for VE against severe exacerbations were explored in post-hoc analyses. RESULTS: Of 606 patients enrolled, 571 were included in the efficacy analysis (279 in NTHi-Mcat vaccine group, 292 in placebo group). VE against severe acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) in various subgroups was 52.11 % (p = 0.015; frequent exacerbators), 65.43 % (p = 0.015; baseline GOLD grade 4), 38.24 % (p = 0.034; previous pneumococcal and/or influenza vaccination). VE was 52.49 % (p = 0.044) for the 6-12 months period after 1 month post-dose 2. Multivariable analysis identified two factors (frequent exacerbator status plus inhaled corticosteroid use at baseline) associated with significant VE against severe AECOPD; in this subpopulation, VE was 74.99 % (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Results suggest potential efficacy with the NTHi-Mcat vaccine against severe exacerbations in certain patients with COPD, in particular those who have frequent exacerbations and use inhaled corticosteroids. This potential signal requires confirmation in an appropriately designed prospective clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03281876.
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 | 0.022 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".