Effect of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate on airway inflammation in COPD: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Airway inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterised by infiltration of CD8+ T cells and CD68+ macrophages and an increased number of neutrophils, whereas few studies have described the presence of eosinophils. Although the anti-inflammatory effects of corticosteroids in stable COPD are unclear, recent studies suggest that combination therapy could be beneficial. A study was therefore undertaken to evaluate combined salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SFC) and fluticasone propionate (FP) alone on inflammatory cells in the airways of patients with COPD. METHODS: Patients were treated in a randomised, double blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial with either a combination of 50 microg salmeterol and 500 microg FP twice daily (SFC, n = 19, 19 men, mean age 62 years), 500 microg FP twice daily (n = 20, 15 men, mean age 64 years) or placebo (n = 21, 17 men, mean age 66 years) for 3 months. At the start and end of treatment bronchoscopy with bronchial biopsies was performed and the numbers of CD8+ T lymphocytes, CD68+ macrophages, neutrophils and eosinophils were measured. RESULTS: CD8+ cells were significantly reduced by SFC compared with placebo (difference -98.05 cells/mm(2); 95% CI -143.14 to -52.9; p<0.001). Such a marked effect was not seen with FP alone (-44.67 cells/mm(2); 95% CI -90.92 to 1.57; p = 0.06). CD68+ macrophages were also reduced by SFC compared with placebo (difference -31.68 cells/mm(2); 95% CI -61.07 to -2.29; p = 0.03) but not by FP. SFC did not significantly change neutrophils and eosinophils compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: SFC has airway anti-inflammatory effects not seen with inhaled corticosteroids alone.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".