MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406886906 · doi:10.1080/02770903.2025.2455416

The efficacy and safety of Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) on cough symptoms in adult patients with asthma, a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study: Chronic Cough in Asthma (COCOA) study

2025· article· en· W4406886906 on OpenAlexaff
Etsuko Tagaya, Jun Shinada, Hiroyuki Nagase, Junko Terada-Hirashima, Masayuki Hojo, Naruhiko Sugihara, Osamitsu Yagi, Tomohiro Akaba, Katsunori Masaki, Koichi Fukunaga, Hiroyuki Ohbayashi, Kaoru Chiba, Soichiro Hozawa, Ryo Atsuta, Yasuhiro Aoki, Hisato Hiranuma, Yasuhiro Gon, Akihiko Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asthma · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
FundersGlaxoSmithKline foundation
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaFluticasone propionateFluticasonePlaceboChronic coughInhaled corticosteroidsAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialMometasone furoateDouble blindAdverse effectInternal medicinePhysical therapyCorticosteroidAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persistent cough bothers many patients with asthma because it worsens their quality of life; therefore, it must be remedied immediately. The efficacy of triple therapy as a first-line treatment for cough remains unclear. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the triple therapy against persistent cough, the clinical effect of regular treatment with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) or placebo in adult patients with asthma was investigated. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicenter trial recruited asthma patients with persistent cough from hospitals and primary care clinics between June 2022 and December 2023. Participants were randomly given FF/UMEC/VI 200/62.5/25 µg or placebo for 6 wk. The primary endpoint was the average change in the cough symptom score from baseline to week 6. Secondary outcomes were effectiveness on cough-related disease burdens (asthma control questionnaire [ACQ]-5, Leicester cough questionnaire [LCQ] and nighttime awakening). Furthermore, lung function and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: increased in the FF/UMEC/VI group as with the results of peak expiratory flow. No significant adverse events associated with FF/UMEC/VI were noted. CONCLUSIONS: In asthma patients with persistent cough, FF/UMEC/VI showed an early response and a significant effect on cough and lung function for 6 wk of treatment. This study is registered with jRCTs031210412.

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)0.006
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AsthmaSame topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207