MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382542914 · doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2023.107334

Efficacy of mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with inadequately controlled asthma with respect to baseline eosinophil count: Post hoc analysis of IRIDIUM study

2023· article· en· W4382542914 on OpenAlexaff
Κonstantinos Κostikas, Jorge Máspero, Kenneth R. Chapman, Karen Mezzi, Xavier Jaumont, David Lawrence, Richard N. van Zyl-Smit

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiratory Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
KeywordsIndacaterolMedicineEosinophilAsthmaInternal medicineExacerbationPost-hoc analysisFluticasoneGastroenterologyBronchodilator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Baseline characteristics could potentially guide asthma treatments. We evaluated whether baseline eosinophil levels affect the efficacy of mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium (MF/IND/GLY) in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Method In this post hoc analysis of IRIDIUM study, efficacy of high-dose MF/IND/GLY (160/150/50 μg, once-daily [o.d.]) versus high-dose MF/IND (320/150 μg o.d.) and high-dose fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL [500/50 μg, twice-daily [b.i.d.]); and efficacy of pooled MF/IND/GLY (160/150/50 μg and 80/150/50 μg) versus pooled MF/IND (320/150 μg and 160/150 μg) was evaluated in patient subgroups with baseline blood eosinophil count of <300 cells/μL or ≥300 cells/μL. Results Overall, 3065 patients were included. At Week 26, high-dose MF/IND/GLY showed improved trough FEV1 versus high-dose MF/IND (Δ78mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ54mL [≥300 cells/μL]) and FLU/SAL (Δ112mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ98mL [≥300 cells/μL]). Similarly, pooled MF/IND/GLY also showed improved trough FEV1 versus pooled MF/IND (Δ75mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ68mL [≥300 cells/μL]). Over 52 weeks, high-dose MF/IND/GLY reduced the annualized rate of moderate or severe asthma exacerbations by 23% and 10%, severe exacerbations by 31% and 15%, and all exacerbation by 33% and 10% versus high-dose MF/IND for subgroups with <300 cells/uL and ≥300 cells/uL, respectively; and by 33% and 41%, 45% and 42%, 42% and 39% versus FLU/SAL, respectively. Similarly, pooled MF/IND/GLY reduced exacerbations by 22% and 8%, 21% and 7%, 27% and 8%, versus pooled MF/IND, for the respective subgroups. Conclusion MF/IND/GLY showed improvement in lung function and reduction in asthma exacerbations over MF/IND and FLU/SAL independent of baseline eosinophil levels, indicating that eosinophil levels did not affect the efficacy of MF/IND/GLY in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02571777 (IRIDIUM).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespiratory MedicineSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207