Gene expression signature of the ageing lung: breathing new life into COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to consistently low birth rates and a higher life expectancy, countries within the European Union are transitioning to a much older population structure.1 The average number of older persons in the total population will increase significantly in the coming decade, as a large proportion of the post-war, baby-boom generation will reach retirement. Compared with generations prior, the ‘baby boomers’ were the most physically fit generation; however, they also grew up when smoking rates and exposure to secondhand smoke were at their peak.2 Tobacco use is a risk factor for six of the eight leading causes of death in the world including respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, stroke and cancer.2 Of these diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major growing cause of morbidity and mortality3 with smoking and secondhand smoke exposure being the most important causative factors of the disease.3 In the European Union, the total direct costs of COPD account for 56% (€38.6 billion) of the total healthcare budget. As there is growing evidence that up to 50% of smokers will eventually develop COPD,4–6 the ageing ‘baby-boomer’ population will therefore have a significant effect on future healthcare demands.7 COPD is characterised by irreversible chronic airflow limitation that is caused by emphysematous destruction of lung elastic tissue and obstruction in the small airways due to occlusion of their lumen by inflammatory mucus exudates, narrowing and obliteration. In COPD, the airflow limitation measured by reduced forced expiratory volume in 1 s, progresses very slowly over time—potentially due to the high redundancy of small airway generations.8 9 Therefore, despite symptoms such as cough and phlegm being associated with susceptible smokers aged 20–44 years who will develop COPD, loss of lung function is …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".