Airway Smooth Muscle Phenotype and Function: Interactions with Current Asthma Therapies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asthma incidence has climbed markedly in the past two decades despite an increased use of medications that suppress airway inflammation and repress contraction of smooth muscle that encircles the airways. Asthmatics exhibit episodes of airway inflammation that potentiates reversible airway smooth muscle spasm. A hallmark diagnostic symptom of asthma is airway hyperresponsiveness to inhaled non-allergic stimuli, such as methacholine, that directly induce airway smooth muscle contraction. Inhaled gluccocorticoids are used for first-line prevention of airway inflammation, and are frequently combined with inhaled beta2-adrenoceptor agonists that can effectively relax airway smooth muscle and restore airway conductance. Leukotriene receptor antagonists and anti-cholinergics can also be used in many patients to ensure optimal control of symptoms. With increasing disease duration irreversible airway restriction develops from inflammation-driven fibro-proliferative airway remodeling that includes increased deposition of extracellular matrix, the accumulation of airway smooth muscle, and increased numbers of myofibroblasts. Mature airway smooth muscle cells are phenotypically plastic, enabling them to subserve contractile, proliferative, migratory and secretory functional responses that contribute to airway remodeling and persistent hyperresponsiveness. This review assesses current understanding of acute and chronic effects of common anti-asthma medications on the diverse phenotype and functional characteristics of airway smooth muscle cells. Furthermore, we describe the significance of these effects in the treatment of asthma symptoms and pathogenesis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".