Long-Term Nonclinical Pulmonary Safety Assessment of Afrezza, a Novel Insulin Inhalation Powder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Afrezza delivers inhaled insulin using the Gen2 inhaler for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 Diabetes. Afrezza was evaluated in long-term nonclinical pulmonary safety studies in 2 toxicology species. Chronic inhalation toxicology studies in rat (26 weeks) and dog (39 weeks) and an inhalation carcinogenicity study in rats were conducted with Technosphere insulin (Afrezza) and with Technosphere alone as a vehicle control. Respiratory tract tissues were evaluated by histopathology and cells expressing proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) were quantified in lungs of rats. Microscopic findings in rats exposed to Afrezza were attributed to the Technosphere particle component, were confined to nasal epithelia, and consisted of eosinophilic globules and nasal epithelial degeneration. There were no Afrezza-related changes in pulmonary PCNA labeling indices in alveoli, large bronchioles, or terminal bronchioles. Microscopic findings in rats exposed to Technosphere particles included eosinophilic globules, mucus cell hyperplasia, and epithelial degeneration in the nasal cavities. PCNA labeling indices were increased in large bronchioles and terminal bronchioles but not in alveoli. There were no Technosphere particle-related findings in the dog study. Afrezza did not exhibit carcinogenic potential in the 2-year study in rats. These nonclinical inhalation studies support the use of Afrezza in humans over extended periods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".