MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Mepolizumab is efficacious in COPD patients with varying levels of airflow obstruction: Pooled Phase III trial results

2025· article· W4416636935 on OpenAlexaff
David Halpin, Jean Bourbeau, MeiLan K. Han, Jinping Zheng, Joel Schamroth, Bhabita Mayer, Steven A. Gould, Surya Prakash Bhatt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMepolizumabCOPDGold standard (test)PlaceboEmergency departmentPost-hoc analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: MATINEE and METREX/METREO enrolled COPD patients with blood eosinophil count (BEC) ≥300 cells/µL, and BEC ≥300 as well as <300 cells/µL, respectively, and airflow obstruction GOLD 2–4. Aims: Assess mepolizumab efficacy by GOLD grade in pooled Phase III METREX/METREO/MATINEE ( NCT02105948 /02105961/04133909). Methods: Exploratory analysis of data from COPD patients with BEC ≥300 cells/µL (N=1146; 568 mepolizumab 100 mg/578 placebo [PBO]) by screening GOLD grade. Outcomes were annualised rate of moderate/severe exacerbations and post hoc annualised rate of exacerbations requiring emergency department (ED) visit and/or hospitalisation, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) responders (≥4-point and ≥2-unit decrease, respectively) at Week 52. Results: Annualised rates of moderate/severe exacerbations were lower with mepolizumab vs PBO in GOLD 2–3; exacerbations requiring ED visit and/or hospitalisation were lower across GOLD 2–4 (Figure). Proportion of SGRQ responders was slightly higher with mepolizumab in GOLD 2–3. No clear trend was seen in CAT by GOLD grade (Figure). Conclusions: A trend of improved exacerbations requiring ED visit and/or hospitalisation and SGRQ was seen with mepolizumab across GOLD 2–4 and GOLD 2–3, respectively. Funding: GSK (117106/117113/208657). erj;66/suppl_69/PA486/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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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