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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".