Peripheral muscle dysfunction in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A majority of patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) display persistent exercise intolerance despite new specific therapies. Whether patients with IPAH exhibit peripheral muscle dysfunction that may contribute to this limitation remains unknown. The hypothesis that the muscles of patients with IPAH are weaker and display morphological changes compared with those of control subjects and that those changes partly correlate with their exercise capacity was tested. OBJECTIVE: To characterise quadriceps function, morphology and the enzymatic profile of patients with IPAH. METHODS: Exercise capacity, limb muscle cross-sectional area by CT scan, quadriceps strength by maximal voluntary contraction and non-volitional magnetic stimulation of the femoral nerve (quadriceps twitch; TWq), and muscle morphology and enzymatic profile by quadriceps biopsy of 10 patients with IPAH were compared with those of 10 matched controls subjects. RESULTS: Patients with IPAH displayed a lower proportion of type I muscle fibres (p=0.05), a lower maximal voluntary contraction (p=0.05) and TWq (p=0.01), and an increased muscular phosphofructokinase/3-hydroxyacyl-CoA-dehydrogenase ratio (p=0.05). They also tended to have lower thigh muscle cross-sectional area (p=0.15). Maximal oxygen uptake correlated with quadriceps strength (R(2)=0.42, p=0.04), and oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold correlated with muscle oxidative capacity assessed by oxidative enzyme level for citrate synthase (R(2)=0.45, p=0.05) and 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA-dehydrogenase (R(2)=0.86, p<0.01), and type I fibre capillarity (R(2)=0.57, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Patients with IPAH present significant peripheral muscle changes that partly correlated with their exercise capacity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".