Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 570

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effect of Bronchoconstriction on Airway Remodeling in Asthma

Grainge, Christopher L., Lau, Laurie C.K., Ward, Jonathon A., Dulay, Valdeep, Lahiff, Gemma, Wilson, Susan, Holgate, Stephen, Davies, Donna E., Howarth, Peter H.·2011·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Asthma is characterized pathologically by structural changes in the airway, termed airway remodeling. These changes are associated with worse long-term clinical outcomes and have been attributed to eosinophilic inflammation. In vitro studies indicate, however, that the compressive mechanical forces that arise during bronchoconstriction may induce remodeling independently of inflammation. We evaluated the influence of repeated experimentally induced bronchoconstriction on airway structural changes in patients with asthma. METHODS: We randomly assigned 48 subjects with asthma to one of four inhalation challenge protocols involving a series of three challenges with one type of inhaled agent presented at 48-hour intervals. The two active challenges were with either a dust-mite allergen (which causes bronchoconstriction and eosinophilic inflammation) or methacholine (which causes bronchoconstriction without eosinophilic inflammation); the two control challenges (neither of which causes bronchoconstriction) were either saline alone or albuterol followed by methacholine (to control for nonbronchoconstrictor effects of methacholine). Bronchial-biopsy specimens were obtained before and 4 days after completion of the challenges. RESULTS: Allergen and methacholine immediately induced similar levels of bronchoconstriction. Eosinophilic inflammation of the airways increased only in the allergen group, whereas both the allergen and the methacholine groups had significant airway remodeling not seen in the two control groups. Subepithelial collagen-band thickness increased by a median of 2.17 μm in the allergen group (interquartile range [IQR], 0.70 to 3.67) and 1.94 μm in the methacholine group (IQR, 0.37 to 3.24) (P<0.001 for the comparison of the two challenge groups with the two control groups); periodic acid-Schiff staining of epithelium (mucus glands) also increased, by a median of 2.17 percentage points in the allergen group (IQR, 1.03 to 4.77) and 2.13 percentage points in the methacholine group (IQR, 1.14 to 7.96) (P=0.003 for the comparison with controls). There were no significant differences between the allergen and methacholine groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bronchoconstriction without additional inflammation induces airway remodeling in patients with asthma. These findings have potential implications for management.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1014350

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 570

Metadata

Authors
Grainge, C. L., Lau, L. C. K., Ward, J. A., Dulay, V., Lahiff, G., Wilson, S., Holgate, S., Davies, D. E., & Howarth, P. H.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2011-05-26
Volume
364
Issue
21
Pages
2006-2015
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2066968375
Cited by
570
References
0
FWCI
35.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of Bronchoconstriction on Airway Remodeling in Asthma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1014350
The paper
Grainge, C. L., Lau, L. C. K., Ward, J. A., Dulay, V., Lahiff, G., Wilson, S., Holgate, S., Davies, D. E., & Howarth, P. H. (2011). Effect of Bronchoconstriction on Airway Remodeling in Asthma. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1014350

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.