Semiquantitative 67Ga scintigraphy as an indicator of response to and prognosis after corticosteroid treatment in idiopathic interstitial pneumonia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The prognosis in some forms of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP), especially idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and fibrotic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), is still poor. A minority of patients will respond to immunosuppressive treatment. In patients with IPF or fibrotic NSIP, pulmonary (67)Ga scintigraphy may be useful for predicting response to therapy and prognosis. The objective of the present study was to evaluate whether semiquantitative (67)Ga scintigraphy can be used to predict responsiveness to therapy with high-dose corticosteroids in a well-defined population of patients with IIP (IPF and fibrotic NSIP). METHODS: This study was performed in a tertiary referral center. We prospectively performed (67)Ga scintigraphy in 23 consecutive patients previously diagnosed with IIP (IPF and fibrotic NSIP) before and after treatment with 3 monthly courses of high-dose methylprednisolone. Lung function tests and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) were performed before and after these 3 courses, and patients were monitored for 1 y after the start of the treatment. RESULTS: During follow-up, 5 patients died, none during the first 3 mo. Although pulmonary (67)Ga uptake significantly decreased after treatment (P = 0.001), there was no correlation between either initial (67)Ga uptake or change in (67)Ga uptake on treatment and 1-y prognosis. This finding was independent of prior immunosuppressive treatment, diagnosis of IPF or NSIP, or whether initial (67)Ga uptake was elevated or not. BAL cellularity was correlated with neither pulmonary (67)Ga uptake nor response to treatment. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary (67)Ga uptake cannot be used to predict response to corticosteroid treatment or prognosis in patients with IIP. Apparently, the (inflammatory) process influenced by treatment with methylprednisolone does not determine the progression of disease. This finding supports the hypothesis that although inflammation is present in IPF and fibrotic NSIP, it is neither the hallmark of the disease nor the major factor determining prognosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".