Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 262

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of differing doses of inhaled budesonide on markers of airway inflammation in patients with mild asthma

Open access
Jatakanon, A., Kharitonov, S., Lim, S., Barnes, P. J·1999·Thorax
DOI 10.1136/thx.54.2.108
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is desirable to prescribe the minimal effective dose of inhaled steroids to control asthma. To ensure that inflammation is suppressed whilst using the lowest possible dose, a sensitive and specific method for assessing airway inflammation is needed. METHODS: The usefulness of exhaled nitric oxide (NO), sputum eosinophils, and methacholine airway responsiveness (PC20) for monitoring airway inflammatory changes following four weeks of treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (budesonide via Turbohaler) were compared. Mild stable steroid naive asthmatic subjects were randomised into two double blind, placebo controlled studies. The first was a parallel group study involving three groups receiving either 100 micrograms/day budesonide (n = 8), 400 micrograms/day budesonide (n = 7), or a matched placebo (n = 6). The second was a crossover study involving 10 subjects randomised to receive 1600 micrograms budesonide or placebo. The groups were matched with respect to age, PC20, baseline FEV1 (% predicted), exhaled NO, and sputum eosinophilia. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in FEV1 following 400 micrograms and 1600 micrograms budesonide (11.3% and 6.5%, respectively, p < 0.05). This was accompanied by significant reductions in eosinophil numbers in induced sputum (0.7 and 0.9 fold, p < 0.05). However, levels of exhaled NO were reduced following each budesonide dose while PC20 was improved only with 1600 micrograms budesonide. These results suggest that exhaled NO and PC20 may not reflect the control of airway inflammation as accurately as the number of eosinophils in sputum. There were dose dependent changes in exhaled NO, sputum eosinophils, and PC20 to inhaled budesonide but a plateau response of exhaled NO was found at a dose of 400 micrograms daily. CONCLUSION: Monitoring the number of eosinophils in induced sputum may be the most accurate guide to establish the minimum dose of inhaled steroids needed to control inflammation. This, however, requires further studies involving a larger number of patients.

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 · 10.1136/thx.54.2.108

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 262

Metadata

Authors
Jatakanon, A., Kharitonov, S., Lim, S., & Barnes, P. J.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1999-02-01
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
108-114
ISSN
0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/thx.54.2.108
OpenAlex
W2101211836
Cited by
262
References
30
FWCI
15.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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 differing doses of inhaled budesonide on markers of airway inflammation in patients with mild asthma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.54.2.108
The paper
Jatakanon, A., Kharitonov, S., Lim, S., & Barnes, P. J. (1999). Effect of differing doses of inhaled budesonide on markers of airway inflammation in patients with mild asthma. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.54.2.108

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.