MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of fezolinetant on sleep disturbance and impairment during treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause

2024· article· en· W4396934593 on OpenAlexaff
Marla Shapiro C M, Antonio Cano, Rossella E. Nappi, Nanette Santoro, Marci L. English, Shayna Mancuso, Antonia Morga, Emad Siddiqui, Udaya Valluri, Faith D. Ottery

Bibliographic record

VenueMaturitas · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAstellas Pharma
KeywordsMedicineVasomotorMenopauseSleep disorderDisturbance (geology)Sleep (system call)AudiologyInternal medicinePsychiatryInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the effect of fezolinetant on patient-reported sleep disturbance and impairment in individuals with vasomotor symptoms (VMS) using pooled data from the SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies. STUDY DESIGN: The SKYLIGHT studies were phase-3, double-blind investigations. Individuals (≥40-≤65 years) who were assigned female at birth and seeking treatment of/relief from moderate-to-severe VMS were enrolled. Participants were randomised to receive placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg during a 12-week treatment period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sleep assessments: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance - Short Form 8b (PROMIS SD SF 8b), PROMIS Sleep-Related Impairment - Short Form 8a (PROMIS SRI SF 8a), and Patient Global Impression of Change/Severity in SD (PGI-C SD and PGI-S SD). Assessments were completed at baseline (except PGI-C SD), weeks 4 and 12. RESULTS: Overall, 1022 individuals were randomised and took ≥1 dose of study drug. PROMIS SD SF 8b results showed that improvements in sleep disturbance were observed for fezolinetant 30 and 45 mg versus placebo (week 12, least squares [LS] mean differences: -0.6 [95 % confidence interval [CI]: -1.7, 0.4] for 30 mg and -1.5 [-2.5, -0.5] for 45 mg). Similar improvements in sleep impairment were reported using the PROMIS SRI SF 8a (week 12, LS mean differences: -1.1 [95 % CI: -2.1, -0.1] for 30 mg and -1.3 [-2.3, -0.3] for 45 mg). For PGI-C SD at week 12, 33.6 % (98/292 participants) of the placebo group felt much/moderately better versus 40.1 % (110/274) and 51.0 % (154/302) of the fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg groups, respectively. For PGI-S SD at week 12, 44.0 % (129/293) of the placebo group had severe/moderate problems versus 41.1 % (113/275) and 36.6 % (111/303) of the fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg groups, respectively. The 12-week timeframe for this analysis was limited by the length of the placebo-controlled period. CONCLUSIONS: Fezolinetant had a beneficial effect on four measures of sleep disturbance and impairment following treatment for VMS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaturitasSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207