Original Article A Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Oral Transmucosal Fentanyl Citrate in the Treatment of Dyspnea on Exertion in Patients With Advanced Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Morphine is the only opioid which has been clearly demonstrated as effective in the treatment of dyspnea. The role of other opioids has not been sufficiently substantiated. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) in the treatment of dyspnea on exertion in patients with advanced cancer. Design: This is a randomized, double-blind crossover clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of OTFC in dyspnea on exertion after the completion of a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). All patients were attended in 2011 by the Palliative Care Supportive Team from Badajoz. In visit 1, patients were ran-domly assigned to 1 of the 2 treatment groups. In visit 2, the patients who had been receiving the investigational product were given placebos and vice versa. Results: Thirteen patients were recruited (26 6MWT), with a mean age of 65 years. Of the patients, 11 (76%)were males and lung cancer was the most frequently represented etiology. The patients were classified into 3e categories: better response in the first period, the same response in both the periods, and better response in the second period. No differences between the treatments were demonstrated (P: 1). There were no differences in changes in oxygen saturation (P:.7541) nor in the distance walked in the different sequences (P:.6550). No significant differences were found in relation to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, either before or after the 6MWT (P:.1234). No secondary effects associated with the medication were observed. Conclusion: It could not be demonstrated that the OTFC improved exertion dyspnea in patients with advanced cancer. A placebo effect was observed in all the patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".