Osteopontin Levels in an Asbestos-Exposed Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Serum osteopontin levels in patients with malignant mesothelioma have been reported to be higher than in healthy subjects. This study assessed serum osteopontin levels in an asbestos-exposed population to test whether nonmalignant asbestos-related disorders could influence osteopontin levels. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This cross-sectional study evaluated serum osteopontin levels in 525 male subjects. Subjects were classified into six different diagnostic groups, including asbestosis (n=23), silicosis (n=20), diffuse pleural thickening (n=110), asbestosis and diffuse pleural thickening (n=13), pleural plaques (n=142), and healthy subjects with a history of asbestos exposure (n=217). RESULTS: Mean serum osteopontin levels differed among the six groups (P<0.0001). Mean osteopontin values of the healthy individuals exposed to asbestos were significantly different from that of subjects with asbestosis (P<0.001) and diffuse pleural thickening (P<0.001). There was a significant difference in mean serum levels of osteopontin in healthy individuals exposed to asbestos (n=217) compared with the group mean of all subjects with asbestos-related disorders (n=288; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that osteopontin levels are elevated in subjects with asbestos-related disorders without malignant mesothelioma. These data indicate that osteopontin, although reported to be useful for detecting malignant mesothelioma in asbestos-exposed individuals, may be influenced by nonmalignant processes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".