Exertional hypoxemia is more severe in fibrotic interstitial lung disease than in COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background and objective Despite its clinical and prognostic significance, few studies have evaluated the severity of exertional oxygen desaturation in fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD). Our objectives were to identify clinical and physiological variables that predict the extent of exertional oxygen desaturation in fibrotic ILD and to quantify the severity of desaturation compared to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods This retrospective study compared the results of 6‐min walk test (6MWT) performed while breathing room air in fibrotic ILD patients and COPD patients eligible for pulmonary rehabilitation. Outcomes included the oxygen saturation (SpO2) nadir and the change in SpO2 from rest during a 6MWT. Predictor variables were identified on unadjusted analysis, followed by multivariate analysis to identify independent predictors of desaturation. Results The study included 134 patients with fibrotic ILD and 274 patients with COPD. The ILD and COPD cohorts had similar age, sex, frequency of major comorbidities, walk distance, baseline SpO2 and baseline Borg dyspnoea scores. DLCO was the strongest predictor of desaturation in both cohorts. Compared to patients with COPD, ILD patients had significantly lower SpO2 nadir values (88.1 ± 6.4 vs 91.0 ± 4.6) and greater decrease in SpO2 from baseline (7.4 ± 5.2 vs 4.5 ± 3.7) after adjusting for demographic features and pulmonary physiology (P < 0.0005), with greater between‐group differences at lower DLCO values. Conclusion Patients with fibrotic ILD have greater oxygen desaturation during 6MWT compared to patients with COPD when adjusting for demographic features and pulmonary physiology. These findings suggest the need for disease‐specific studies to evaluate the potential utility of ambulatory oxygen in fibrotic ILD.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".