Trial reportInflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.]2014
Safety and efficacy of high-dose leukocytapheresis in patients with refractory asthma.
Trial report in Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.], 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening asymptomatic school children for early asthma by determining airway narrowing through peak expiratory flow rate measurement.Journal of education and health promotion · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND
designAn open-label, non-randomized, single-arm study was performed to investigate the safety and efficacy of high-dose leukocytapheresis (pulse LCAP) for refractory asthma. SUBJECTS: Six patients who fulfilled the ATS workshop criteria for refractory asthma were enrolled and completed this clinical study. TREATMENT: After 4 weeks of observation, pulse LCAP using a large LCAP filter, Cellsorba(®) CS-180S, was performed twice with a 1-week interval at a target dose of 5 L per treatment session.
methodsThe clinical response was assessed by monitoring the peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) twice a day. The asthma control test (ACT) was used to evaluate the condition of asthma symptoms. The fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) as a biomarker for eosinophilic airway inflammation was measured using a chemiluminescence analyzer.
resultsPEFR in the morning or the evening and the sum total of the score on the ACT were increased after two consecutive sessions of pulse LCAP. FeNO decreased after pulse LCAP.
conclusionsThe results suggest the efficacy of pulse LCAP for refractory asthma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.