ArticleDrug delivery and translational research2018
A novel method for studying airway hyperresponsiveness in allergic guinea pigs in vivo using the PreciseInhale system for delivery of dry powder aerosols.
Article in Drug delivery and translational research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance Testing of a Homemade Aerosol Generator for Pulmonary Administration of Dry Powder Formulations to Mice.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Animal models of mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 pathology.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Review
- Adapting the Aerogen Mesh Nebulizer for Dried Aerosol Exposures Using the PreciseInhale Platform.Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery · 2020Article
- Pulmonary immunization: deposition site is of minor relevance for influenza vaccination but deep lung deposition is crucial for hepatitis B vaccination.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2019Article
- The Generation of a Comprehensive Spectral Library for the Analysis of the Guinea Pig Proteome by SWATH-MS.Proteomics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Inhaled adenosine receptor agonists induce bronchoconstriction and inflammation in asthma and are used as bronchial challenge agents for the diagnosis of asthma and in respiratory drug development. Recently developed dry powder aerosols of adenosine have several advantages over nebulised adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) as bronchial challenge agents. However, reverse translation of this bronchial challenge technique to pre-clinical drug development is limited by the difficulty of administering powder aerosols to animals. The aim of the current study was to develop methods for delivering powder aerosols of adenosine receptor agonists to sensitised guinea pigs (as a model of allergic asthma) and evaluate their effect as challenge agents for the measurement of airway responsiveness. The PreciseInhale system delivered micronised AMP and adenosine powders, with mass median aerodynamic diameters of 1.81 and 3.21 μm and deposition fractions of 31 and 48% in the lungs, respectively. Bronchoconstrictor responses in passively sensitised, anaesthetised, spontaneously breathing guinea pigs were compared to responses to nebulised and intravenously administered AMP and adenosine. AMP- and adenosine-induced bronchoconstriction following all routes of administration with the magnitude of response ranking intravenous > dry powder > nebulisation, probably reflecting differences in exposure to the adenosine agonists delivered by the different routes. In conclusion, the PreciseInhale system delivered AMP and adenosine dry powder aerosols accurately into the lungs, suggesting this method can be used to investigate drug effects on airway responsiveness.
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.