Adiposity and pulmonary function: Relationship with body fat distribution and systemic inflammation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Obesity is associated with changes in pulmonary function and increased systemic inflammation. We explored the relationships among adiposity, body fat distribution indices, serum inflammatory markers and pulmonary function. METHODS: This was a post-hoc cross-sectional analysis that included subjects who had previously participated in randomized studies on obesity at our centre. Non-smoking sedentary men (282 subjects, mean age 42) without respiratory diseases were studied. BMI, waist circumference (WC), visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue (AT), lung residual volume (RV), vital capacity (VC) and expiratory reserve volume (ERV) were measured. Serum leptin, adiponectin, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels were measured. RESULTS: In subjects with metabolic syndrome (n=124), percent predicted ERV and RV were significantly associated with BMI (ERV: r=-0.19, p=0.02, RV: r=-0.28, p=0.0007), WC (r=-0.20, p=0.02, r=-0.26, p=0.002), visceral (r=-0.22, p=0.007, r=-0.25, p=0.002) and subcutaneous AT (r=-0.19, p=0.02, r=-0.28, p=0.0007). Percent predicted VC correlated with visceral (r=-0.20, p=0.02) and subcutaneous AT (r=-0.18, p=0.03). Leptin was strongly correlated with BMI (MS/no-MS: r=0.52, p=0.0005/r=0.62, p < 0.0001), WC (r=0.41, p=0.008/r=0.49, p < 0.0001), visceral (r=0.27,p=0.09/0.43, p < 0.0001) and subcutaneous AT (r=0.46, p=0.003/r=0.66, p < 0.0001), while adiponectin levels were associated in subjects with no-MS with WC (r=-0.20, p=0.01), visceral (r=-0.22, p=0.008), and subcutaneous AT (r=-0.17, p=0.05). When adjusted for anthropometric measures, neither ERV, RV nor VC was significantly correlated with serum leptin, adiponectin, TNF-α, or hs-CRP levels. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the influence of obesity on lung function in healthy subjects is mostly mediated by mechanical factors. Furthermore, not only BMI but also the pattern of fat distribution should be considered when studying associations between adiposity indices and mechanical or inflammatory variables potentially associated with pulmonary function.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".