Risk of herpes zoster in patients prescribed inhaled corticosteroids: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known concerning risk factors for herpes zoster in the general population. We hypothesised that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a risk factor for herpes zoster especially among users of inhibitors of cytochrome P450 enzymes involved in their metabolism. METHODS: We identified a cohort of adult users of respiratory medications in the General Practice Research Database and carried out a nested case control analysis of inhaled corticosteroid use among 8900 new cases of herpes zoster and 88032 controls matching on age and calendar time. RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratio for the relationship between current use of ICS and the occurrence of herpes zoster was 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.07). There was no increase in risk of herpes zoster even at higher ICS doses; odds ratio 1.05 (95% CI, 0.96-1.14). Among subjects with concomitant prescriptions for an ICS and an inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A4, the point estimate for the association between herpes zoster and the use of higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.81-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: The use of inhaled corticosteroids, even at high doses and in conjunction with inhibitors of their metabolism, was not a significant risk factor for the occurrence of herpes zoster in adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".