Effect of incremental exercise on airway and systemic inflammation in patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airway and systemic inflammation are features of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and there is growing interest in clarifying the inflammatory processes. Strenuous exercise induces an intensified systemic inflammatory response in patients with COPD, but no study has investigated the airway inflammatory and anti-inflammatory responses to exercise. Twenty steroid-naïve, ex-smokers with diagnosed COPD (forced expired volume in 1 s = 66 ± 12%) underwent baseline collection of venous blood and induced sputum followed by an incremental exercise test to symptom limitation 48 h later. Additional venous blood samples were collected following exercise at 0, 2, and 24 h, while induced sputum was collected 2 and 24 h after exercise. Sputum and blood samples were analyzed for differential cell count, CD4(+) and CD8(+) T lymphocytes (serum only), interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10, chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 5 (CCL5), and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (serum only). There was an increase in the number of sputum eosinophils (cells/gram, P = 0.012) and a reduction in sputum IL-6 (P = 0.01) 24 h postexercise. Sputum IL-8 and CCL5 were also persistently decreased after exercise (P = 0.0098 and P = 0.0012, respectively), but sputum IL-10 did not change. There was a decrease in serum eosinophils 2 h after exercise (P = 0.0014) and a reduction in serum CCL5 immediately following and 2 h postexercise (P < 0.0001). Both serum eosinophils and CCL5 returned to baseline levels within 24 h. An acute bout of exercise resulted in a significant increase in the number of sputum eosinophils, which may be mediated by serum CCL5. However, there was also a reduction in sputum proinflammatory cytokines, suggesting some anti-inflammatory effect of exercise in the lungs of steroid-naïve patients with COPD.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".