MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children

2004· review· en· W4211122402 on OpenAlexaff
Francine M. Ducharme, Franco di Salvio

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaAdverse effectExacerbationClinical trialRandomized controlled trialPlaceboMeta-analysisLeukotrieneRelative riskPediatricsInternal medicineConfidence intervalAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anti-leukotrienes agents are currently being studied as alternative first line agents to inhaled corticosteroids in mild to moderate chronic asthma. OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of anti-leukotriene agents with inhaled glucocorticoids (ICS) and to determine the dose-equivalence of anti-leukotrienes to daily dose of ICS. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (1966 to Aug 2003), EMBASE (1980 to Aug 2003), CINAHL (1982 to Aug 2003), the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (August 2003), abstract books, and reference lists of review articles and trials. We contacted colleagues and international headquarters of anti-leukotrienes producers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared anti-leukotrienes with inhaled corticosteroids during a minimal 30-day intervention period in asthmatic patients aged 2 years and older. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality or trials and extracted trial data. The primary outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes included lung function, indices of chronic asthma control, adverse effects and withdrawal rates. MAIN RESULTS: 27 trials (including 1 trial testing two protocols) met the inclusion criteria; 13 were of high methodological quality; 20 are published in full-text. All trials pertained to patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Only 3 trials focused on children and adolescents. Trial duration varied from 4 to 37 weeks. In most trials, daily dose of ICS was 400 mcg of beclomethasone or equivalent. Patients treated with anti-leukotrienes were 65% more likely to suffer an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids [Relative Risk 1.65; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.00]. Twenty six (95% CI: 17 to 47) patients must be treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids to cause one extra exacerbation. Significant differences favouring ICS were noted in secondary outcomes where()the improvement in FEV(1) reached 130 mL [13 trials; 95% CI: 50, 140 mL ]. Other significant benefits of ICS were seen for symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, rescue medication use, symptom-free days, and quality of life. Anti-leukotriene therapy was associated with 160% increased risk of withdrawals due to poor asthma control. Twenty nine (95% CI 20 to 48) patients must be treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids to cause one extra withdrawal due to poor control. Risk of side effects was not different between groups. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled steroids at a dose of 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or equivalent are more effective than anti-leukotriene agents given in the usual licensed doses. The exact dose-equivalence of anti-leukotriene agents in mcg of ICS remains to be determined. Inhaled glucocorticoids should remain the first line monotherapy for persistent asthma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations75
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207