Evaluating Asthma Clinical Remission with Inhaled Therapy: Post Hoc Analyses of CAPTAIN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".