Airway Inflammation after Cessation of Exposure to Agents Causing Occupational Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Subjects with occupational asthma (OA) generally present asthma symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness after cessation of exposure. We hypothesized that they are also left with airway inflammation. We assessed 133 subjects with OA at a mean interval of 8.7 years (0.5-20.8 years) after cessation of exposure by questionnaire, airway caliber, and responsiveness to methacholine. Satisfactory samples of induced sputum were obtained from 98 subjects. We defined three groups of subjects: (1) cured: normalization of the concentration of methacholine provoking a 20% decrease in FEV1 (PC20), (2) improved: increase in PC20 by 3.2-fold or more but PC20 still abnormal, and (3) not improved: no significant change in PC20. In all, 9/28 subjects (32.1%) with no improvement versus 6/56 (10.7%) subjects with partial and complete improvements had sputum eosinophils equal to or greater than 2% and 11/28 (39.3%) subjects versus 11/56 (19.6%) subjects showed sputum neutrophils equal to or greater than 61%. Levels of interleukin-8 and of the neutrophil-derived myeloperoxidase were significantly more elevated in sputum of subjects with no improvement. Those in the cured or improved groups had a significantly longer time lapse since diagnosis and a higher PC20 at the time of diagnosis. We conclude that failure to improve after cessation of exposure to an agent causing OA is associated with airway inflammation at follow-up.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".