Anti‐inflammatory effects of once daily low dose inhaled ciclesonide in mild to moderate asthmatic patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ciclesonide exhibits clinical efficacy at 160 microg (ex-actuator) once daily but the anti-inflammatory effects at this dose are not known. We wished to know whether 4 weeks therapy with ciclesonide pMDI 160 microg once daily in the morning exhibited significant anti-inflammatory effects. METHODS: Seventeen patients with mild persistent asthma (FEV(1) 3.35 l) were recruited into a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized crossover study. Measurements were made after ciclesonide and placebo treatment as well as after run-in and washout periods, for adenosine monophosphate (AMP) bronchial challenge (primary variable), exhaled nitric oxide (NO) and induced sputum (in a subgroup). RESULTS: The mean (SEM) AMP bronchial challenge PC(20) following ciclesonide (140 (63) mg/ml) was significantly (P < 0.001) increased compared with placebo (17 (8) mg/ml), run-in (13 (5) mg/ml) and washout (9 (3) mg/ml) periods. This amounted to an eightfold (CI: 5.3-12.0) for ciclesonide vs placebo. Likewise, there were significant improvements in exhaled NO levels and a significant reduction in induced sputum eosinophil cell counts. CONCLUSION: We have shown that inhaled ciclesonide given at 160 microg once daily in the morning exhibits significant anti-inflammatory effects that are in keeping with the previously described clinical effects.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".