P019 <break /> Autoantibody status, decline in lung function, and survival in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the most common idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. A proportion of IPF patients have positive autoantibodies, however the clinical significance of positive serology in IPF is unknown. The aim of this study is to determine the proportion of IPF patients with positive serology and the impact of serology on lung function decline and survival. Methods: Consecutive patients with a diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD) presenting to the ILD clinic in Calgary were recruited into this prospective longitudinal cohort study. Patients included in this study were those who had serology performed during routine workup for ILD. Demographics, serology, serial PFTs and survival were compared between patients with and without positive serology. Survival analysis was performed using a Cox-proportional hazards regression, adjusting for GAP score. Results: Of 202 patients enrolled in the ILD database study, 61 patients with IPF had serologic testing performed. One or more positive autoantibodies was found in 25 patients (40.9%). The most common autoantibody was ANA (defined by titer 1:320 or cytoplasmic or nucleolar pattern), found in 23 patients (37.7%). There were no differences in age, sex, smoking status, or baseline FVC or DLCO between the two groups. There was no association between autoantibody status and rate of decline in FVC (p = 0.699), DLCO (p = 0.105), or survival (HR = 1.65, p = 0.21).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".