MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982242297 · doi:10.1517/14656566.2011.600689

Montelukast for the treatment of asthma in the adult population

2011· review· en· W1982242297 on OpenAlexaff
Salima Amlani, Thanu Nadarajah, R Andrew McIvor

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonSt Joseph's Health CareMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontelukastMedicineAsthmaIntensive care medicinePopulationConcomitantLeukotrieneBronchoconstrictionClinical trialInhalerRandomized controlled trialLeukotriene receptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Asthma is a complex process that results from airway inflammation and manifests as bronchoconstriction. Infiltration of the airway mucosa and lumen by activated inflammatory cells, along with release of mediators, can occur extensively. Chemical mediators known as leukotrienes are believed to play a major role in this process. At present, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the pharmacologic cornerstone of asthma management. However, asthma control may remain suboptimal when relying on ICS because of problems with compliance, poor inhaler technique and concerns about the side effects of steroids; additional agents are often required to control symptoms. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), namely montelukast, provide a safe and effective additional anti-inflammatory treatment option. There is particular benefit for patients with asthma and concomitant allergic rhinitis. AREAS COVERED: Montelukast has been well studied through rigorous clinical trials. A thorough review of the literature has been undertaken to assess the evidence supporting the use of LTRAs. This review focuses on the role of montelukast not only as monotherapy but also as add-on therapy to ICS in the adult asthma population, as well as adult asthmatics with concomitant allergic rhinitis. In addition, there is often some discrepancy between the evidence generated in the idealized asthma patients recruited into randomized clinical trials and results obtained in the real-life setting. This review assesses recent clinical trials evaluating the real-life evaluation of montelukast, achieved mainly through open-label observational studies. EXPERT OPINION: Oral LTRA bring remarkable ease of anti-inflammatory treatment administration and symptom improvement with minimal side effects to the management of adult asthma. Basic asthma mechanisms and much-valued scientific groundwork has been identified by exploring target asthma treatment with anti-leukotriene therapy. This will have a significant impact in the future development of targeted asthma therapies as well as the current management of asthma and other inflammatory medical conditions.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations49
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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