Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 612

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Blood Eosinophils to Direct Corticosteroid Treatment of Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Open access
Bafadhel, Mona, McKenna, Susan, Terry, Sarah, Mistry, Vijay, Pancholi, Mitesh, Venge, Per, Lomas, David A., Barer, Michael R., Johnston, Sebastian L., Pavord, Ian D., Brightling, Christopher E.·2012·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

RATIONALE: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and responses to treatment are heterogeneous. OBJECTIVES: Investigate the usefulness of blood eosinophils to direct corticosteroid therapy during exacerbations. METHODS: Subjects with COPD exacerbations were entered into a randomized biomarker-directed double-blind corticosteroid versus standard therapy study. Subjects in the standard arm received prednisolone for 2 weeks, whereas in the biomarker-directed arm, prednisolone or matching placebo was given according to the blood eosinophil count biomarker. Both study groups received antibiotics. Blood eosinophils were measured in the biomarker-directed and standard therapy arms to define biomarker-positive and -negative exacerbations (blood eosinophil count > and ≤ 2%, respectively). The primary outcome was to determine noninferiority in health status using the chronic respiratory questionnaire (CRQ) and in the proportion of exacerbations associated with a treatment failure between subjects allocated to the biomarker-directed and standard therapy arms. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 86 and 80 exacerbations in the biomarker-directed and standard treatment groups, respectively. In the biomarker-directed group, 49% of the exacerbations were not treated with prednisolone. CRQ improvement after treatment in the standard and biomarker-directed therapy groups was similar (0.8 vs. 1.1; mean difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.6; P = 0.05). There was a greater improvement in CRQ in biomarker-negative exacerbations given placebo compared with those given prednisolone (mean difference, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.90; P = 0.04). In biomarker-negative exacerbations, treatment failures occurred in 15% given prednisolone and 2% of those given placebo (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The peripheral blood eosinophil count is a promising biomarker to direct corticosteroid therapy during COPD exacerbations, but larger studies are required.

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 · 10.1164/rccm.201108-1553oc

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 612

Metadata

Authors
Bafadhel, M., McKenna, S., Terry, S., Mistry, V., Pancholi, M., Venge, P., Lomas, D. A., Barer, M. R., Johnston, S. L., Pavord, I. D., & Brightling, C. E.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2012-07-01
Volume
186
Issue
1
Pages
48-55
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2155765761
Cited by
612
References
4
FWCI
27.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Blood Eosinophils to Direct Corticosteroid Treatment of Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.201108-1553oc
The paper
Bafadhel, M., McKenna, S., Terry, S., Mistry, V., Pancholi, M., Venge, P., Lomas, D. A., Barer, M. R., Johnston, S. L., Pavord, I. D., & Brightling, C. E. (2012). Blood Eosinophils to Direct Corticosteroid Treatment of Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201108-1553oc

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.