Lung diffusing capacity relates better to short‐term progression on HRCT abnormalities than spirometry in mild asbestosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary function tests (PFT), particularly spirometry and lung diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DL(CO) ), have been considered useful methods for the detection of the progression of interstitial asbestos abnormalities as indicated by high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). However, it is currently unknown which of these two tests correlates best with anatomical changes over time. METHODS: In this study, we contrasted longitudinal changes (3-9 years follow-up) in PFTs at rest and during exercise with interstitial abnormalities evaluated by HRCT in 63 ex-workers with mild-to-moderate asbestosis. RESULTS: At baseline, patients presented with low-grade asbestosis (Huuskonen classes I-II), and most PFT results were within the limits of normality. In the follow-up, most subjects had normal spirometry, static lung volumes and arterial blood gases. In contrast, frequency of DL(CO) abnormalities almost doubled (P < 0.05). Twenty-three (36.5%) subjects increased the interstitial marks on HRCT. These had significantly larger declines in DL(CO) compared to patients who remained stable (0.88 vs. 0.31 ml/min/mm Hg/year and 3.5 vs. 1.2%/year, respectively; P < 0.05). In contrast, no between-group differences were found for the other functional tests, including spirometry (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that the functional consequences of progression of HRCT abnormalities in mild-to-moderate asbestosis are better reflected by decrements in DL(CO) than by spirometric changes. These results might have important practical implications for medico-legal evaluation of this patient population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".