MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353042445 · doi:10.1136/thorax-2021-217865

Randomised controlled trial for the titration of oral corticosteroids using markers of inflammation in severe asthma

2023· article· en· W4353042445 on OpenAlexaff
J. Michael Ramsahai, Jodie L. Simpson, Alistair Cook, Peter G. Gibson, Vanessa M. McDonald, Christopher Grainge, Liam G. Heaney, Peter Wark

Bibliographic record

VenueThorax · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaRandomized controlled trialInflammationInhaled corticosteroidsAdrenal cortex hormonesInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Biomarkers are used to select biologic therapies for patients with severe asthma, but not to regularly adjust therapy, especially oral corticosteroids (OCS). OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to test the efficacy of an algorithm to guide the titration of OCS using blood eosinophil count and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTIONS AND SETTING: This proof-of-concept prospective randomised controlled trial assigned adult participants with severe uncontrolled asthma (n=32) to biomarker-based management (BBM) where OCS dose was adjusted based on a composite biomarker score comprised of blood eosinophil count and FeNO, or a standard best practice (SBP) arm. The study was conducted at the Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia. Participants were recruited from the local Severe Asthma Clinic and were blinded to their study allocation. MAIN OUTCOME: The coprimary outcomes were number of severe exacerbations and time to first severe exacerbation assessed over 12 months. RESULTS: There was a longer median time to first severe exacerbation with BBM, although not significant (295 vs 123 days, Adj. HR: 0.714; 95% CI: 0.25 to 2.06; p=0.533). The relative risk of a severe exacerbation in BBM (n=17) vs SBP (n=15) was 0.88 (Adj.; 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.62; p=0.675) with a mean exacerbation rate per year of 1.2 and 2.0, respectively. There was a significant reduction in the proportion of patients requiring an emergency department (ED) visit using BBM (OR 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.91; p=0.041). There was no difference in the cumulative OCS dose used between the two groups. CONCLUSION: A treatment algorithm to adjust OCS using blood eosinophil count and FeNO is feasible in a clinical setting and resulted in a reduced odds of an ED visit. This warrants further study to optimise the use of OCS in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial was registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616001015437).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThoraxSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207