MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exposure to Budesonide, Glycopyrronium, and Formoterol With a Next-Generation Propellant Does Not Exceed Exposure With Hydrofluoroalkane-134a Propellant When Administered Via Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler With a Spacer

2025· article· en· W4416975952 on OpenAlexaff
Hitesh Pandya, Mehul S. Patel, Michael Gillen, Artur Bednarczyk, Marek Kokot, Yubo Tan, Maria Heijer, M. Andersson, David Petullo, Mandeep Jassal

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Therapeutics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsAstraZeneca (Canada)
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsPropellantFormoterolInhalerFormoterol FumarateMetered-dose inhaler

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA-134a), the propellant in the marketed budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) formulation, has a global warming potential (GWP) that falls above environmental regulation thresholds and therefore will be phased out. With global efforts to minimize carbon emissions, the hydrofluoroolefin-1234ze (HFO-1234ze) propellant, with a >99% lower GWP than HFA-134a, is in development for pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs). Spacers support drug delivery in patients with poor pMDI inhalation technique, but it is unknown if BGF exposure with HFO-1234ze exceeds that observed with HFA-134a when using a spacer. METHODS: This Phase I study assessed systemic BGF component exposure with HFO-1234ze versus HFA-134a when using a spacer, and for HFO-1234ze with and without a spacer. Participants (N = 42) were randomized to BGF with HFA-134a with a spacer (reference), HFO-1234ze with a spacer (test), and HFO-1234ze without a spacer (descriptive treatment) over 3 treatment periods in 1 of 6 sequences. As spacer devices help to increase exposure, the upper limit of the 90% confidence interval (CI) of geometric mean ratios (GMRs) was of interest, and bioequivalence was not included as a study objective. FINDINGS: Analyses demonstrated the upper 90% CI of the GMRs for maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration curve from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) were <125% for all BGF components for HFO-1234ze versus HFA-134a when using a spacer, indicating exposure with HFO-1234ze did not exceed exposure with HFA-134a. Additionally, Cmax was increased for all BGF components with HFO-1234ze when using versus not using a spacer, with the largest increases observed among participants with the lowest exposure when not using a spacer, likely due to poor inhalation technique. No new safety findings, and no deaths or serious adverse events, occurred during the study. IMPLICATIONS: These findings provide evidence that may help to support the future use of HFO-1234ze propellant in BGF pMDIs.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical TherapeuticsSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207