Serial blood eosinophils and clinical outcome in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood eosinophils have been suggested as a potential biomarker in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and their stability over time has been investigated in a few studies. However, the association between the stability of blood eosinophils and long-term clinical outcomes in COPD patients has yet to be fully elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the stability of blood eosinophils and its association with clinical outcomes in COPD patients. In total, 299 COPD patients from the Korean Obstructive Lung Disease cohort with at least two blood eosinophil measurements were included. Patients were stratified according to a cut-off of 300 cells/μL, and the association between eosinophil changes and all-cause mortality was analysed. The annual decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), serial changes in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ), and exacerbations during follow-up were compared among eosinophil groups. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the blood eosinophil cut-off: persistently < 300 cells/μL (PL; n = 175), variable (V; n = 68), and persistently ≥300 cells/μL (PH; n = 56). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics (age, sex, smoking, body mass index, use of inhaled corticosteroids, exacerbations in the previous year, FEV1 (L or % predicted), or emphysema score) among the groups. During a median follow-up of 6.0 years, the PH group had a better survival rate than the PL group (adjusted mortality rate ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.09–0.97; P = 0.045). The PH group also showed improved symptoms and impact domains of SGRQ score compared to the PL group. No difference was found in annual FEV1 decline or exacerbations during follow-up among the groups. Patients with persistently high blood eosinophils had a better survival rate than those with persistently low blood eosinophils. Serial follow-up of blood eosinophils could help to predict outcomes in COPD patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".