Suppressive effects of nitric oxide‐releasing prednisolone NCX‐1015 on the allergic pleural eosinophil recruitment in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The addition of a nitric oxide (NO)-releasing moiety to prednisolone was shown to enhance the anti-inflammatory activity of this glucocorticoid in some experimental conditions, but its effectiveness in the context of eosinophilic inflammation remains to be elucidated. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the anti-inflammatory effect of prednisolone to a NO-releasing derivative of prednisolone, NCX-1015, using a model of allergen-evoked eosinophil recruitment in rats. The efficacy of a NO-donor compound, DETA-NONOate, was also assessed for comparison. METHODS: Wistar rats were actively sensitized with Al(OH)(3) plus ovalbumin and 14 days later challenged with antigen intrapleurally. Treatments were performed locally 1 h before challenge. Cysteinyl-leucotrienes (Cys-LT) and eotaxin were measured by ELISA. RESULTS: Antigen challenge induced an eosinophil infiltration at 12 h, maximal at 24 h. It also caused an increase in the levels of Cys-LTs in the pleural exudate and in the expression of 5-lipoxygenase (5-LO) in infiltrated leucocytes at 6 h, peaking at 12 h and persisting for at least 24 h. Treatment with equimolar doses of prednisolone and NCX-1015 inhibited the late eosinophil infiltration, although the dose required to produce maximal inhibition was about one-tenth that of prednisolone. Cys-LT generation and 5-LO expression were inhibited by NCX-1015 but not by prednisolone. Treatment with prednisolone combined with the NO-donor DETA-NONOate led to a greater inhibition of the eosinophilia and Cys-LT generation as compared with either drug alone. Administration of the steroid receptor antagonist RU 486, 1 h before prednisolone and NCX-1015, abolished the inhibitory effect of the former, under conditions where it only partially affected the latter. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that NCX-1015 provided a greater anti-inflammatory effect than prednisolone on the allergic eosinophil recruitment in rats, suggesting that NO-releasing steroids can be considered as a promising therapeutic approach to allergic diseases.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".