MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inhaled Antibiotics for Lower Airway Infections

2014· review· en· W2153220508 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCystic Fibrosis CanadaNational Institutes of HealthBritish Columbia Lung AssociationUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's FoundationCystic Fibrosis Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAntibioticsAirwayIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhaled antibiotics have been used to treat chronic airway infections since the 1940s. The earliest experience with inhaled antibiotics involved aerosolizing antibiotics designed for parenteral administration. These formulations caused significant bronchial irritation due to added preservatives and nonphysiologic chemical composition. A major therapeutic advance took place in 1997, when tobramycin designed for inhalation was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) with chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. Attracted by the clinical benefits observed in CF and the availability of dry powder antibiotic formulations, there has been a growing interest in the use of inhaled antibiotics in other lower respiratory tract infections, such as non-CF bronchiectasis, ventilator-associated pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, mycobacterial disease, and in the post-lung transplant setting over the past decade. Antibiotics currently marketed for inhalation include nebulized and dry powder forms of tobramycin and colistin and nebulized aztreonam. Although both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have approved their use in CF, they have not been approved in other disease areas due to lack of supportive clinical trial evidence. Injectable formulations of gentamicin, tobramycin, amikacin, ceftazidime, and amphotericin are currently nebulized "off-label" to manage non-CF bronchiectasis, drug-resistant nontuberculous mycobacterial infections, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and post-transplant airway infections. Future inhaled antibiotic trials must focus on disease areas outside of CF with sample sizes large enough to evaluate clinically important endpoints such as exacerbations. Extrapolating from CF, the impact of eradicating organisms such as P. aeruginosa in non-CF bronchiectasis should also be evaluated.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.360 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it