Tumour necrosis factor family genes in a phenotype of COPD associated with emphysema
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic factors are believed to play a role in the individual susceptibility to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) family genes have been widely investigated but inconsistent results may lie either in the genetic heterogeneity of populations or in the poor phenotype definition. A genetic study was performed using a narrower phenotype of COPD. The authors studied 86 healthy smokers and 63 COPD subjects who were enrolled based on irreversible airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity <70% predicted) and a diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide <50% predicted (moderate-to-severe COPD associated with pulmonary emphysema). The following polymorphisms were investigated: TNF-308, the biallelic polymorphism located in the first intron of the lymphotoxin-alpha gene, and exon 1 and exon 6 of the TNF receptor 1 and 2 genes, respectively. No significant deviations were found concerning the four polymorphisms studied between the two populations. The authors confirm that the tumour necrosis factor family genes, at least for the polymorphisms investigated, are not major genetic risk factors for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Caucasians, either defined in terms of emphysema (this study) or airflow obstruction (previous studies). Nevertheless, the authors would like to emphasise the importance of narrowing the phenotype in the search for genetic risk factors in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".