Paper Details 
Original Abstract of the Article :
Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are often prescribed as first-line therapy for patients with asthma Despite their efficacy and improved safety profile compared with oral corticosteroids, the potential for systemic side effects continues to cause concern. In order to reduce the potential for systemic s...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2893943/

データ提供:米国国立医学図書館(NLM)

Navigating the Desert of Asthma Research: Finding the Right Model for Inhaled Corticosteroids

Asthma, a chronic respiratory condition, is often managed with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). While ICSs are generally safe and effective, concerns remain about potential systemic side effects. This study explores the feasibility of using rat models to evaluate both the efficacy and side effects of ICSs delivered as nanosuspensions via inhalation. The researchers tested fluticasone and ciclesonide, common ICSs, and found that the rat model could differentiate pulmonary efficacy (reduced inflammation in the lungs) from systemic side effects (adrenal and thymus gland changes). However, this differentiation was more pronounced at lower doses, suggesting that the model might not be suitable for evaluating maximum efficacy.

A Journey Through the Sands of Research

Finding the right animal model for research is like navigating a vast desert – a process that requires careful exploration and evaluation. This study provides valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of using rat models for evaluating inhaled corticosteroids. The findings suggest that while the rat model can be useful for assessing pulmonary efficacy and differentiating side effects at lower doses, it may not be ideal for studying maximum efficacy.

Choosing the Right Path

The research highlights the need for careful consideration when choosing animal models for preclinical studies. The rat model can be a valuable tool, but it’s important to be aware of its limitations and to choose the most appropriate model for the specific research question. It’s like choosing the right camel for a journey – a sturdy beast for navigating rough terrain, but one that might not be ideal for sprinting across the sands.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This study sheds light on the importance of selecting the right animal model for research. Just like a traveler chooses a camel suited for the specific journey, researchers need to carefully choose models that accurately reflect the complex dynamics of the research question. It’s a constant process of exploration and refinement, searching for the oasis of knowledge in the vast desert of scientific research.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 2011-07-14
  2. Date Revised 2021-10-20
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

20672144

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

PMC2893943

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.