MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999959825

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium Respimat® SMI in COPD in two 1-year randomized studies

2010· other· en· W6999959825 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2010
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCOPDExacerbationInhalerAnticholinergicPlaceboTiotropium bromideQuality of life (healthcare)Adverse effectRandomized controlled trial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eric Bateman1, Dave Singh2, David Smith3, Bernd Disse4, Lesley Towse5, Dan Massey5, Jon Blatchford5, Demetri Pavia5, Rick Hodder61Division of Pulmonology, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa; 2University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; 3North Bristol Lung Centre, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK; 4Boehringer Ingelheim, GmbH, Ingelheim, Germany; 5Boehringer Ingelheim, Ltd., Bracknell, Berkshire, UK; 6Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaAbstract: Two 1-year studies evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of tiotropium 5 or 10 μg versus placebo, inhaled via the Respimat® Soft MistTM Inhaler (SMI). The two studies were combined and had 4 co-primary endpoints (trough FEV1 response, Mahler Transition Dyspnea Index [TDI] and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire scores all at week 48, and COPD exacerbations per patient-year). A total of 1990 patients with COPD participated (mean FEV1: 1.09 L). The mean trough FEV1 response of tiotropium 5 or 10 μg relative to placebo was 127 or 150 mL, respectively (both P < 0.0001). The COPD exacerbation rate was significantly lower with tiotropium 5 μg (RR = 0.78; P = 0.002) and tiotropium 10 μg (RR = 0.73; P = 0.0008); the health-related quality of life and Mahler TDI co-primary endpoints were significantly improved with both doses (both P < 0.0001). Adverse events were generally balanced except anticholinergic class effects, which were more frequent with active treatment. Fatal events occurred in 2.4% (5 μg), 2.7% (10 μg), and 1.6% (placebo) of patients; these differences were not significant. Tiotropium Respimat® SMI 5 μg demonstrated sustained improvements in patients with COPD relative to placebo and similar to the 10 μg dose but with a lower frequency of anticholinergic adverse events.Keywords: COPD, exacerbations, FEV1, quality of life, Respimat®, tiotropium

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207