Mortality by Level of Emphysema and Airway Wall Thickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: There is limited knowledge of the prognostic value of quantitative computed tomography (CT) measures of emphysema and airway wall thickness (AWT) on mortality. OBJECTIVES: To examine 8-year mortality in relation to CT-measured emphysema and AWT, and assess if potential impact of these predictors remained after adjustment for lung function. METHODS: In the Norwegian GenKOLS study of 2003-2005, 947 ever-smokers (49% with COPD) aged 40-85 years performed spirometry and CT examination. Mortality data from 2003-2011 were gathered from the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry. CT emphysema % low-attenuation areas (%LAA) and standardized measure for AWT (AWT-Pi10) were main predictors. We performed Laplace regression for survival data, estimating survival time for specified population percentiles within each emphysema category. Models were adjusted for sex, FEV1, COPD status, age, body mass index, smoking, and inflation level. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: During 8-year follow-up all-cause mortality rate was 15%. Although 4% of the subjects with %LAA less than 3 died, 18% with %LAA 3-10 and 44% with %LAA greater than or equal to 10 died. After adjustment, the comparable percentile subjects with medium and high emphysema had 19 months shorter survival than subjects who died in the lowest emphysema category. Subjects with %LAA greater than or equal to 10 had 33 and 37 months shorter survival than the lowest emphysema category with regard to respiratory and cardiovascular mortality, respectively. No significant associations were found between %LAA and cancer and lung cancer mortality. AWT did not predict mortality independently, but a positive interaction with emphysema was observed. CONCLUSIONS: AWT affected mortality with increasing degree of emphysema, whereas CT measure of emphysema was a strong independent mortality predictor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".