ArticleFrontiers in allergy2023
Response to intranasal
Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Chronic Rhinosinusitis at the Interface of Type 2 Inflammation, Epithelial Barrier Dysfunction, and Microbiome Dysbiosis.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- The Efficacy and Safety of Probiotics in the Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Ceftiofur treatment of sows results in long-term alterations in the nasal microbiota of the offspring that can be ameliorated by inoculation of nasal colonizers.Animal microbiome · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Justification: We have previously documented that in individuals with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) refractory to surgery, intranasal application of live Method: Epithelial brushings collected prospectively as a sub-study of the Results: Differentially identified transcripts and pathways were assessed for the overall population and the clinical phenotypes of CRSwNP and CRSsNP. Patterns of response to treatment were similar across all groups, implicating pathways for the regulation of immunity and epithelial cell regulation. These resemble the patterns of improvement observed following successful treatment with endoscopic sinus surgery or azithromycin. Conclusion: Gene expression profiling following the application of live bacteria to the diseased sinus epithelium highlights the implication of multiple components of the inflammation-microbiome-epithelial barrier axis implicated in CRS. These effects appear to involve both epithelial restoration and modulation of innate and adaptive immunity, supporting the potential interest of targeting the sinus epithelium and the microbiome as potential CRS therapies.
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.