MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004030776 · doi:10.1164/rccm.200404-543oc

Effects of Fluticasone on Systemic Markers of Inflammation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

2004· article· en· W2004030776 on OpenAlexaff
Don D. Sin, Paige Lacy, Ernest L. York, S. F. Paul Man

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFluticasoneCOPDInternal medicinePrednisonePlaceboGastroenterologyC-reactive proteinCorticosteroidSystemic inflammationInflammationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systemic inflammation is present in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which has been linked to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We determined the effects of oral and inhaled corticosteroids on serum markers of inflammation in patients with stable COPD. We recruited 41 patients with mild to moderate COPD. After 4 weeks during which inhaled corticosteroids were discontinued, patients were assigned to fluticasone (500 mcg twice a day), oral prednisone (30 mg/day), or placebo over 2 weeks, followed by 8 weeks of fluticasone at 500 mcg twice a day and another 8 weeks at 1,000 mcg twice a day. Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids increased baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) levels by 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-152%). Two weeks with inhaled fluticasone reduced CRP levels by 50% (95% CI, 9-73%); prednisone reduced it by 63% (95% CI, 29-81%). No significant changes were observed with the placebo. An additional 8 weeks of fluticasone were associated with CRP levels that were lower than those at baseline (a 29% reduction; 95% CI, 7-46%). Inhaled and oral corticosteroids are effective in reducing serum CRP levels in patients with COPD and suggest their potential use for improving cardiovascular outcomes in COPD.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations350
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207