MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117101903 · doi:10.1007/s12325-025-03442-x

Evaluating Asthma Clinical Remission with Inhaled Therapy: Post Hoc Analyses of CAPTAIN

2025· article· en· W7117101903 on OpenAlexaff
J Oppenheimer, Ian Pavord, Tom Corbridge, Jodie Crawford, Steven A. Gould, Mohamed Hamouda, Peter Howarth, Alison Moore, Stephen G. Noorduyn, David Slade, Stephen Weng, Njira Lugogo

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmaPost-hoc analysisRheumatologyPost hocMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical remission (CR) is an emerging treatment goal in asthma. However, evidence showing whether CR is achievable with inhaled therapy is lacking. This post hoc analysis of CAPTAIN evaluated attainability of a composite CR endpoint with inhaled fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) or FF/VI. CAPTAIN (GSK 205715) was a Phase IIIA, randomized, controlled, 24–52-week trial comparing once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI in adults with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma despite ICS/LABA. CR was defined as a composite endpoint comprising no systemic corticosteroids, no severe exacerbations, ACQ-5 total score < 1.50, and either change from baseline in FEV 1 ≥ 0 ml (lung function stabilization) or ≥ 100 ml (lung function optimization), assessed for patients meeting the CR endpoint at Week 24 (W24) and achieving CR at W52 with FF/UMEC/VI (100/62.5/25, 200/62.5/25 μg) versus FF/VI (100/25, 200/25 μg). Additional analyses assessed the CR endpoint at W24/W52 using ACQ-5 ≤ 0.75 and ≤ 1.00 thresholds. Adjusted odds/risk ratios for CR were calculated for W24. More patients met the CR endpoint (lung function stabilization/optimization) with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI at W24 (stabilization: 42–47% vs 31–36%; optimization: 31–36% vs 19–26%) and W52 (stabilization: 43–47% vs 33–34%; optimization: 30–38% vs 21–24%). Using more stringent ACQ-5 thresholds, fewer patients met the CR endpoint with ACQ ≤ 0.75 versus < 1.50 across treatment arms and timepoints. The odds and probability of meeting the CR endpoint versus not meeting the CR endpoint at W24 were greater with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI, regardless of FF dose. The results of this post hoc analysis demonstrate that CR is achievable with inhaled therapy in moderate-to-severe asthma and is more likely with FF/UMEC/VI than FF/VI. CR should be considered an attainable treatment goal for patients with asthma, irrespective of disease severity or treatment history. Trial Registration : ClinialTrials.gov identifier, NCT02924688.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.014
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.420 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207