Is the aging process accelerated in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent research suggests that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may be a disease of accelerated aging. The senescence hypothesis of COPD pathogenesis is supported by in-vitro, in-vivo and clinical studies. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the senescence hypothesis of COPD and summarize methods that are used to assess cellular aging. RECENT FINDINGS: Accelerated aging due to exposure to cigarette smoke is hypothesized to induce rapid progression of COPD. Recent studies have shown that COPD patients have enhanced expression of senescence-associated proteins in the lung and in the peripheral circulation compared to healthy controls. Murine models of accelerated aging demonstrate spontaneous emphysematous changes in the lungs, while lungs of COPD patients demonstrate enhanced markers of senescence in fibroblasts and alveolar cells. More recently, studies of telomeres, which shorten with cellular aging, have shown that COPD patients may experience accelerated telomere attrition compared with healthy controls. However, studies to date have been relatively small and have produced heterogeneous results. SUMMARY: The evidence for the role of accelerated aging in COPD progression is growing and senescence is one possible molecular pathway by which COPD occurs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".