Treatment for sleep apnea by continuous positive airway pressure improves levels of inflammatory markers - a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with coronary artery disease (CAD). Intermittent hypoxia associated with OSA increases sympathetic activity and may cause systemic inflammation, which may contribute to CAD in patients with OSA. Treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) has been shown to change levels of inflammatory markers. We analyzed data from published studies by a systematic meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To asses if treatment for sleep apnea by CPAP will affect levels of inflammatory markers. DATA RESOURCES: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library. METHODS: Study eligibility criteria full text English studies of adult, human subjects, addressing values of at least one of the inflammatory markers before and after CPAP treatment. We used the definition of OSA as an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of ≥ 5/h, reported values in mean and standard deviation or median with range. PARTICIPANTS: Adult, human. INTERVENTIONS: CPAP treatment for OSA. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHOD: A total of 3835 studies were reviewed for inclusion, while 23 studies pooled for analysis. A total of 14 studies with 771 patients were pooled for C-reactive protein (CRP); 9 studies with 209 patients were pooled for tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α); and 8 studies with 165 patients were pooled for interleukin-6 (IL-6). ENDPOINT DEFINITIONS: THE FOLLOWING INFLAMMATORY MARKERS WERE CHOSEN: CRP, TNF-α, and IL-6. RESULTS: C-reactive protein: Study level means ranged from 0.18 to 0.85 mg/dl before CPAP treatment and 0.10 to 0.72 mg/dl after CPAP treatment. Mean differences, at a study level, ranged from -0.05 to 0.50. The pooled mean difference was 0.14 [95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.20, p < 0.00001]. There was heterogeneity in this endpoint (df = 13, p < 0.00001, I(2) = 95%). Tumor necrosis factor-α: Study level means ranged from 1.40 to 50.24 pg/ml before CPAP treatment and 1.80 to 28.63 pg/ml after CPAP treatment. Mean differences, at a study level, ranged from -1.23 to 21.61. The pooled mean difference was 1.14 [95% confidence interval 0.12 to 2.15, p = 0.03]. There was heterogeneity in this endpoint (df = 8, p < 0.00001, I2 = 89%). Interleukin-6: Study level means ranged from 1.2 to 131.66 pg/ml before CPAP treatment and 0.45 to 66.04 pg/ml after CPAP treatment. Mean differences, at a study level, ranged from -0.40 to 65.62. The pooled mean difference was 1.01 [95% confidence interval -0.00 to 2.03, p = 0.05]. There was heterogeneity in this endpoint (df = 7, p < 0.00001, I(2) = 95%). LIMITATIONS: Only published data. Studies pooled were mainly small, non-randomized trials. CONCLUSION: Sleep apnea treatment with CPAP improves levels of inflammatory markers.
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 | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".