Pneumonia risk in asthma patients using inhaled corticosteroids: a quasi‐cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Studies have linked the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) to excess pneumonia risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. The risk in asthma patients remains unclear. The objective of the present study was to examine the risk of pneumonia with ICSs in asthma patients aged 12-35 years. METHODS: We formed a cohort of asthma patients treated from 1990 to 2007 using Quebec health insurance databases. Subjects were considered currently exposed if they had had an ICS dispensed within the 60 days prior to their pneumonia index event or matched person-moment. Secondary analyses investigated the risk of pneumonia according to ICS dose and type. Rate ratios (RRs) and rate differences (RDs) were both estimated through a quasi-cohort approach. RESULTS: The cohort included 152 412 subjects, of whom 1928 had a pneumonia event during follow-up. There was an increased risk of pneumonia associated with current use of ICSs [RR 1.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57, 2.14] or an excess risk of 1.44 cases per 1000 person-years (RD 1.44; 95% CI 1.03, 1.85). There was an excess pneumonia risk with low doses (RR 1.60; 95% CI 1.06, 2.45), moderate doses (RR 1.53; 95% CI 1.12, 2.08) and high doses (RR 1.96; 95% CI 1.64, 2.34) of ICSs, and with budesonide (RR 2.67; 95% CI 2.05, 3.49) and fluticasone (RR 1.93; 95% CI 1.58, 2.36), specifically relative to no use. When accounting for potential protopathic bias, the risk with current use of ICSs was attenuated (RR 1.48; 95% CI 1.22, 1.78). CONCLUSION: ICS use in asthma patients appears to be associated with an increased risk of pneumonia and is present for both budesonide and fluticasone.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".