Theophylline does not potentiate the effects of a low dose of dexamethasone in horses with recurrent airway obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Theophylline has been shown to have corticosteroid-sparing effects for the treatment of human asthma. A similar effect, if present in horses, would allow diminishing the dose of corticosteroids administered to equine patients with inflammatory airway diseases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether theophylline potentiates the effects of a low dose of dexamethasone when treating horses with recurrent airway obstruction (RAO). HYPOTHESIS: Theophylline has steroid-sparing effects in horses with RAO. METHODS: Ten mature mixed breed horses in clinical exacerbation of RAO were studied. Using an incomplete crossover design and 3 experimental periods of 7 days duration, horses were distributed randomly in 5 treatment groups; and administered dexamethasone s.i.d., at either 0.05 mg/kg bwt i.v. or per os, or 0.02 mg/kg bwt alone or combined with theophylline at 5 mg/kg bwt per os b.i.d. A fifth group was treated with theophylline alone at the above dosage. Lung function was evaluated prior to drug administration and then 3 and 7 days later. RESULTS: Oral administration of dexamethasone alone or combined with theophylline failed to improve lung function significantly in RAO affected horses. Theophylline alone also failed to improve lung function in all treated horses. Conversely, dexamethasone administration at 0.05 mg/kg bwt i.v. resulted in a significant improvement in lung function starting on Day 3. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Oral theophylline for 7 days did not improve the effects of a low dose of dexamethasone for the treatment of horses with RAO.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".