MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413208481 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103402

Safety of budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate delivered by HFO-1234ze versus HFA-134a in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a phase 3, multi-site, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-comparator study

2025· article· en· W4413208481 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Omar S. Usmani, Fernando J. Martínez, Hitesh Pandya, Matthew Camiolo, Artur Bednarczyk, Marek Kokot, Christer Gottfridsson, Magnus Aurivillius, Lars Pettersson, Jie Mei, Karin Skansen, Jennifer Bell, David Petullo, Kathryn Collison, Patrik Bondarov, Mandeep Jassal, Mehul Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineDouble blindBudesonideFormoterol FumaratePulmonary diseaseInternal medicinePlaceboAsthmaFormoterolPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) contain a hydrofluorocarbon propellant, such as hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA-134a), which is known to have global warming potential (GWP). Transitioning pMDIs to propellants with lower GWP will reduce the environmental impact of pMDIs. This study assessed the safety of a near-zero GWP propellant, hydrofluoroolefin-1234ze (HFO-1234ze), compared with HFA-134a when used in the delivery of budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) in participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The results of this study advance our understanding of the safety of HFO-1234ze compared with HFA-134a. Methods: This phase 3, double-blind, parallel-group study (ClinicalTrials.govNCT05573464) across 9 countries (Argentina, Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Mexico, Poland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States) included participants (aged 40-80 years) with physician-diagnosed COPD using dual or triple inhaled maintenance therapies, COPD Assessment Test score ≥10, ≥10 pack-years smoking history, and no comorbid diagnosis of asthma or other clinically significant diseases impacting study outcomes. Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive either BGF HFO-1234ze or BGF HFA-134a (two inhalations of 160/7·2/5·0 μg twice daily) for 12 weeks in the main safety analysis set (or 52 weeks [first 120 participants per treatment]). Safety endpoints included the incidence of adverse events (AEs), measures of vital signs, clinical laboratory tests, and electrocardiograms. Findings: Participants were recruited between 27 September 2022 and 19 May 2023. A total of 874 participants were screened. Of 558 treated participants (mean [standard deviation] age, 67·0 [7·4] years; male, 315 [56·5%]) in the 12-week safety analysis set, 280 received BGF HFO-1234ze, and 278 received BGF HFA-134a. The AE incidence was balanced between formulations in the 12-week (HFO-1234ze, 124 [44·3%]; HFA-134a, 114 [41·0%]) and 52-week (HFO-1234ze, 80 [66·7%]; HFA-134a, 94 [78·3%]) safety analysis sets. Interpretation: These findings support the potential for HFO-1234ze to replace HFA-134a in pMDIs containing BGF, which could be evaluated further in a real-world setting. Funding: The study was supported by AstraZeneca.

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)0.001
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207