Airway Nitric Oxide Diffusion in Asthma: Role in Pulmonary Function and Bronchial Responsiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If the nitric oxide (NO) diffusing capacity of the airways (DNO) is the quantity of NO diffusing per unit time into exhaled gas (q) divided by the difference between the concentration of NO in the airway wall (Cw) and lumen, then DNO and C(w) can be estimated from the relationship between exhaled NO concentration and expiratory flow. In 10 normal subjects and 25 asthmatic patients before and after treatment with inhaled beclomethasone, DNO averaged 6.8 +/- 1.2, 25.5 +/- 3.8, and 22.3 +/- 2.7 nl/s/ppb x 10(-3), respectively; C(w) averaged 149 +/- 31.9, 255.3 +/- 46.4, and 108.3 +/- 14.3 ppb, respectively; and DNOC(w) (the maximal from diffusion) averaged 1,020 +/- 157.5, 6,512 +/- 866, and 2,416 +/- 208.5 nl/s x 10(-3), respectively. DNO and DNOC(w) in the asthmatic subjects before and after steroids were greater than in normal subjects (p < 0.0001), but C(w) was not different. Within asthmatic subjects, steroids caused C(w) and DNOC(w) to fall (p < 0.0001), but DNO was unchanged. DNOC(w) after steroids, presumably reflecting maximal diffusion of constitutive NO, was positively correlated with methacholine PC(20) and FEV(1)/FVC before or after steroids. The increased DNO measured in asthmatic patients may reflect upregulation of nonadrenergic, noncholinergic, NO-producing nerves in airways in compensation for decreased sensitivity of airway smooth muscle to the relaxant effects of endogenous NO.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".