MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation with tezepelumab (COURSE)

2024· article· en· W4404104885 on OpenAlexaff
Dave Singh, Christopher E. Brightling, Klaus F. Rabe, Meilan Han, Mohit Bhutani, Jean Bourbeau, Stephanie A. Christenson, Mark Dransfield, Parameswaran Nair, Ales Kotalik, Åsa Hellqvist, Gun Almqvist, N.S. Sindhwani, Monika Gołąbek, Néstor A. Molfino, Sandhia S Ponnarambil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)COPDCopd exacerbationExacerbationComputer scienceMedicineInternal medicineEngineeringAcute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In COURSE ( NCT04039113 ), tezepelumab numerically reduced the annualized rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations (overall by 17% [p=0.1042]; in patients with a blood eosinophil count [BEC] ≥150 cells/µL by 37%) and severe COPD exacerbations by 48% vs placebo over 52 weeks. Objective: Assess the efficacy of tezepelumab in delaying moderate or severe COPD exacerbations. Methods: COURSE was a phase 2a, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (≥40–80 years) with moderate to very severe COPD were randomized 1:1 to tezepelumab 420 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for up to 52 weeks. Eligible patients were receiving triple inhaled maintenance therapy and had ≥2 moderate or severe COPD exacerbations in the 12 months before enrolment. Time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation, and the proportions of patients with ≥1 of each, were assessed. Results: Of 333 randomized and treated patients (tezepelumab, n=165; placebo, n=168), 41%, 59% and 17% had baseline BECs <150, ≥150 and ≥300 cells/µL, respectively. Tezepelumab delayed time to first moderate or severe exacerbation vs placebo in the overall population (HR, 0.80 [95% CI: 0.61–1.06]; median days: 253 vs 214) and in those with baseline BECs <150 (HR, 0.88 [95% CI: 0.57–1.38]), ≥150 (HR, 0.74 [95% CI: 0.51–1.07]) and ≥300 cells/µL (HR, 0.51 [95% CI: 0.24–1.04]). Overall, time to first severe exacerbation was also delayed vs placebo (HR, 0.70 [95% CI: 0.36–1.33]). Fewer tezepelumab than placebo recipients had ≥1 moderate or severe exacerbation (57% vs 63%) or ≥1 severe exacerbation (10% vs 13%). Conclusion: Tezepelumab delayed the time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation, overall and across BEC subgroups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→