Association of Plasma Adipokines with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Severity and Progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Two adipokines, leptin and adiponectin, regulate metabolic and inflammatory systems reciprocally. The role of adiponectin in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been studied. However, there are few data evaluating the relationship of plasma leptin with COPD severity or progression. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship of leptin, adiponectin, and the leptin/adiponectin ratio with COPD severity and progression according to COPD phenotypes. METHODS: Plasma leptin and adiponectin levels were measured in 196 subjects with COPD selected from the Korean Obstructive Lung Disease cohort. Using a linear regression model and mixed linear regression, we determined the relationship of plasma leptin and adiponectin levels and the leptin/adiponectin ratio to COPD severity and progression over 3 years. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The concentration of adiponectin in plasma positively correlated with percent emphysema on initial computed tomography (CT) (adjusted P = 0.022), whereas plasma leptin concentrations and the leptin/adiponectin ratio exhibited a significant inverse correlation with initial FEV1 (adjusted P = 0.013 for leptin and adjusted P = 0.041 for leptin/adiponectin ratio). Increased plasma leptin and leptin/adiponectin ratio were significantly associated with change in percent emphysema over 3 years (adjusted P = 0.037 for leptin and adjusted P = 0.029 for leptin/adiponectin ratio), whereas none of the adipokines demonstrated an association with FEV1 decline over the 3-year period. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma adiponectin and leptin vary according to COPD phenotypes. Plasma leptin and the leptin/adiponectin ratio, but not adiponectin, were significantly associated with changes in CT-assessed emphysema, suggesting a potential role as a biomarker in emphysema progression in 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".