The effect of dornase alfa on ventilation inhomogeneity in patients with cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outcome measures to assess therapeutic interventions in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients with mild lung disease are lacking. Our aim was to determine if the lung clearance index (LCI) can detect a treatment response to dornase alfa in paediatric CF patients with normal spirometry. CF patients between 6-18 yrs of age with FEV(1 )≥ 80% pred were eligible. In a crossover design, 17 patients received 4 weeks of dornase alfa and placebo in a randomised sequence separated by a 4-week washout period. The primary end-point was the change in LCI from dornase alfa versus placebo. A mixed model approach incorporating period-dependent baselines was used. The mean ± sd age was 10.32 ± 3.35 yrs. Dornase alfa improved LCI versus placebo (0.90 ± 1.44; p = 0.022). Forced expiratory flow at 25-75% expired volume measured by % pred and z-scores also improved in subjects on dornase alfa (6.1% ± 10.34%; p = 0.03 and 0.28 ± 0.46 z-score; p = 0.03). Dornase alfa significantly improved LCI. Therefore the LCI may be a suitable tool to assess early intervention strategies in this patient population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".