MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976895177 · doi:10.1517/14656560903078428

Mometasone furoate: an inhaled glucocorticoid for the management of asthma in adults and children

2009· review· en· W1976895177 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Cowie, Mark A. Giembycz, Richard Leigh

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and ImmunityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMometasone furoateFluticasone propionateMedicineAsthmaGlucocorticoidDrugFluticasoneDry-powder inhalerBioavailabilityCorticosteroidDosingClinical trialPharmacologyInhalerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mometasone furoate has been available for clinical use, starting with a dermatologic preparation, for nearly 20 years. An inhaled format of the drug for management of asthma had been in development during the last decade and has been available for clinical use for 6 years as a dry powder inhaler delivering either 100 mcg or 200 mcg per dose. It has a long half-life and is suitable for daily dosing. The drug is approved for use in the USA for the treatment of asthma in patients aged 4 years or over. Mometasone furoate is a topically potent glucocorticoid with a favorable risk-benefit profile. A wide variety of randomized clinical trials have shown the drug to have a clinically beneficial effect on asthma comparable to fluticasone propionate, and to permit the reduction or withdrawal of oral glucocorticoid therapy in patients with asthma. Mometasone furoate has approximately 1% oral bioavailability but does produce systemic glucocorticoid effects from the drug released from the lung and its metabolites. These effects are minimal when mometasone is used appropriately at low or moderate doses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on PharmacotherapySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207