In patients with severe asthma with eosinophilia in reslizumab clinical trials, high peripheral blood eosinophil levels are associated with low FEV1 reversibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background A post hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo–controlled, Phase 3 trials of intravenous reslizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 (IL-5) biologic for severe eosinophilic asthma. Methods Relationships between baseline blood eosinophil levels (EOS), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) reversibility to β2-agonists and treatment outcomes were assessed. Results Mean baseline FEV1 reversibility was numerically lower among patients with high (≥ 400 cells/µL) versus low baseline EOS. Reslizumab produced clinically significant improvement in FEV1, exacerbation rates and patient-reported outcomes after 52 weeks, including in patients with high EOS and low FEV1 reversibility (≤ 14%) to β2-agonists at baseline. Conclusions Clinical trial eligibility criteria stipulating minimum FEV1 reversibility to β2-agonists of ≥ 12% might exclude patients who would benefit from treatment with anti-IL-5 biologics.
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 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".