Bronchial inflammation in corticosteroid‐sensitive and corticosteroid‐resistant asthma at baseline and on oral corticosteroid treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathophysiology of corticosteroid (CS)-resistant asthma remains incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine if failure of asthma to clinically improve with CS is due to a defective response of airway bronchial inflammation to these drugs. METHODS: Twenty-one asthmatics having a decreased baseline FEV1 that improved >or= 30% with inhaled beta2 agonist got bronchial biopsies before and at the end of an oral CS treatment (methylprednisolone 40 mg daily for 14 days). They were arbitrarily divided into two groups according to baseline FEV1 improvement following this treatment: >or= 23% designated as CS-sensitive (CSS) (n = 10) and < 15% as CS-resistant (CSR) (n = 11). RESULTS: Before oral CS, counts of bronchial mucosa inflammatory cells identified by immunohistochemistry (CD3, MBP, tryptase, CD68, neutrophil elastase and CD25 for lymphocytes, eosinophils, mast cells, macrophages, neutrophils and IL-2 receptors, respectively) were similar in CSS and CSR subjects. Oral CS decreased CD3+ cell counts (medians: 60-20 cells/mm(2); P = 0.014) and MBP+ cell counts (medians: 19-4 cells/mm(2); P = 0.03) in CSS asthmatics, but only tryptase+ cell counts in CSR asthmatics (medians: 30-18 cells/mm(2); P = 0.05). Few bronchial neutrophil elastase+ cells were observed and their counts were similar in the two groups of asthmatics before and when on oral CS (all medians: = 2 cells/mm(2)). CONCLUSIONS: These data show that, in these subjects with moderate to severe asthma, lymphocytes and eosinophils constitute most of the inflammatory cells infiltrating the bronchial mucosa. They also demonstrated that clinical impaired response to CS is associated with a persistent bronchial mucosa cellular infiltrate despite oral CS treatment. Additional studies are required to determine the role of this CS-resistant bronchial inflammation in the impaired asthma clinical response to these drugs.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".