Impact of varying lung function threshold on clinical remission in asthma with FF/UMEC/VI: CAPTAIN post hoc analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale: Clinical remission (CR) is an emerging composite outcome in asthma assessed after 52 weeks and includes stabilisation/optimisation of lung function (LF) as one of the components. This CAPTAIN post hoc analysis assessed the impact of different LF thresholds on a CR composite outcome in patients receiving FF/UMEC/VI or FF/VI. Methods: CAPTAIN compared FF/UMEC/VI vs FF/VI in adults with uncontrolled moderate–severe asthma despite ICS/LABA. The CR composite endpoint, defined as no systemic corticosteroid use, no severe exacerbations, ACQ-5 total score ≤1.5 and change from baseline in trough FEV1 ≥0mL (LF stabilisation) or FEV1 ≥100mL (LF optimisation), was assessed at Weeks 24 and 52 (w24, w52) for FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 or 200/62.5/25µg, and FF/VI 100/25 or 200/25µg. Results: A greater proportion of patients met the components of CR at w24 and achieved CR at w52 with FF/UMEC/VI vs FF/VI, regardless of LF threshold or FF dose. Stabilisation of LF vs optimisation increased the proportion of patients achieving CR (Figure). Conclusions: LF stabilisation and optimisation were attained with FF/UMEC/VI and FF/VI within the composite of CR. The relative difference between arms was consistent irrespective of LF threshold, FF dose, or timepoint. LF may be a major contributor to CR for patients with uncontrolled moderate–severe asthma not considered for biologics therapy. Funding: GSK (205715/ NCT02924688 ) erj;64/suppl_68/PA1199/F1 F1 F1
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 | 0.017 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".