Supplementation of fexofenadine therapy with nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution to treat ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Ocular symptoms are often under-treated in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. The efficacy of fexofenadine hydrochloride 60 mg capsules supplemented with nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution was evaluated to determine the optimal drug regimen for control of ocular allergic symptoms. METHODS: In this 5-week, open-label, randomized, multicentre comparative study, 89 patients with documented ragweed pollen allergy received fexofenadine b.i.d. with nedocromil rescue, fexofenadine q.d. with nedocromil b.i.d., or fexofenadine rescue with nedocromil b.i.d. during the ragweed pollen season. RESULTS: For all regimens, mean symptom severity scores for itching, burning, tearing, redness, grittiness, discharge, light sensitivity and swelling improved significantly (P < 0.003). Similarly, all groups experienced significant (P < 0.02) improvement in all clinical signs: erythema, oedema, discharge, conjunctival injection and conjunctivitis, as well as quality-of-life scores (P < 0.0001). All regimens reduced overall symptom severity scores after 5 min (P < 0.05) with relief persisting over 12 h (P < 0.03). Improvements in mean symptoms, signs and quality-of-life scores were similar among the treatment groups as were onset and duration of action even though patients in two of the three study arms were taking one-half or less of the recommended fexofenadine dosage. Patients and physicians judged the regimens containing lower fexofenadine dosages (with nedocromil b.i.d.) to be more effective overall than the regimen containing the highest fexo-fenadine dosage (with nedocromil as rescue only). CONCLUSIONS: Supplementation of oral fexofenadine therapy with nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution relieves ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, allowing control of rhinal symptoms with half the recommended dosage of fexofenadine.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".