Magnitude and Determinants of Short-Term Tachyphylaxis to Methacholine in Subjects with Symptomatic or Asymptomatic Airway Hyperresponsiveness and in Normal Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tachyphylaxis to methacholine has been reported in nonasthmatic subjects. In a recent study on the prevalence of airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and atopy, we performed duplicate methacholine inhalation tests at a 60-min interval, in subjects with symptomatic asthma (n = 33), asymptomatic AHR (AAHR) (n = 72) and in a group of normal subjects (n = 130); 135/235 subjects were atopic. All subjects had a respiratory questionnaire, allergy skin prick tests, blood eosinophil counts and determination of total serum IgE level. In asthmatic subjects, PC20 just failed to be significantly higher on a second methacholine challenge (p = 0.09); when they were stratified according to severity of AHR and use of inhaled corticosteroids, we observed a significant increase in PC20 on the second test in asthmatic subjects with mild AHR not using corticosteroids (p < 0.01). In normal controls, PC20 methacholine was slightly increased on rechallenge (p < 0.01) as it was in those with AAHR (p < 0.01). There was no relationship between the magnitude of the change in PC20 and age, sex, baseline airway responsiveness, percent fall in FEV1 on the first challenge, atopic score, blood eosinophil counts and serum IgE levels. In conclusion, tachyphylaxis to methacholine is observed in normal or mild asthmatic subjects not using inhaled corticosteroids and in subjects with AAHR; however, in most subjects this change is of a small magnitude.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".