Potential mechanisms to explain how LABAs and PDE4 inhibitors enhance the clinical efficacy of glucocorticoids in inflammatory lung diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhaled glucocorticoids acting via the glucocorticoid receptor are a mainstay treatment option for individuals with asthma. There is a consensus that the remedial actions of inhaled glucocorticoids are due to their ability to suppress inflammation by modulating gene expression. While inhaled glucocorticoids are generally effective in asthma, there are subjects with moderate-to-severe disease in whom inhaled glucocorticoids fail to provide adequate control. For these individuals, asthma guidelines recommend that a long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) be administered concurrently with an inhaled glucocorticoid. This so-called "combination therapy" is often effective and clinically superior to the inhaled glucocorticoid alone, irrespective of dose. LABAs, and another class of drug known as phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitors, may also enhance the efficacy of inhaled glucocorticoids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In both conditions, these drugs are believed to work by elevating the concentration of cyclic adenosine-3',5'-monophosphate (cAMP) in target cells and tissues. Despite the success of inhaled glucocorticoid/LABA combination therapy, it remains unclear how an increase in cAMP enhances the clinical efficacy of an inhaled glucocorticoid. In this report, we provide a state-of-the-art appraisal, including unresolved and controversial issues, of how cAMP-elevating drugs and inhaled glucocorticoids interact at a molecular level to deliver enhanced anti-inflammatory benefit over inhaled glucocorticoid monotherapy. We also speculate on ways to further exploit this desirable interaction. Critical discussion of how these two drug classes regulate gene transcription, often in a synergistic manner, is a particular focus. Indeed, because interplay between glucocorticoid receptor and cAMP signaling pathways may contribute to the superiority of inhaled glucocorticoid/LABA combination therapy, understanding this interaction may provide a logical framework to rationally design these multicomponent therapeutics that was not previously possible.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".