Pulmonary Outcomes Associated with Long-Term Azithromycin Therapy in Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Chronic azithromycin is commonly used in cystic fibrosis based on short controlled clinical trials showing reductions in pulmonary exacerbations and improved FEV1. Long-term effects are unknown. Objectives Examine pulmonary outcomes among chronic azithromycin users compared with matched controls over years of use and consider combined azithromycin use in cohorts using chronic inhaled tobramycin or aztreonam. Methods This retrospective cohort study used the U.S. cystic fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry. Incident chronic azithromycin users were compared with matched controls by FEV1% predicted rate of decline and rates of intravenous antibiotic use to treat pulmonary exacerbations. Propensity score methods were utilized to address confounding by indication. Predefined sensitivity analyses based on lung function, Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) status, and follow-up time intervals were conducted. Measurements and Main Results Across 3 years, FEV1% predicted per-year decline was nearly 40% less in those with PA using azithromycin compared with matched controls (slopes, −1.53 versus −2.41% predicted per yr; difference: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30–1.47). This rate of decline did not differ based on azithromycin use in those without PA. Among all cohorts, use of intravenous antibiotics was no different between azithromycin users and controls. Users of inhaled tobramycin and azithromycin had FEV1% predicted per-year decline of −0.16 versus nonusers (95% CI, −0.44 to 0.13), whereas users of inhaled aztreonam lysine and azithromycin experienced a mean 0.49% predicted per year slower decline than matched controls (95% CI, −0.11 to 1.10). Conclusions Results from this study provide additional rationale for chronic azithromycin use in PA-positive patients to reduce lung function decline.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".