The leaky lung test: a pilot study using inhaled mannitol to measure airway barrier function in asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Airway epithelial barrier dysfunction is emerging as an important feature of asthma pathogenesis, but this is difficult to measure in individual subjects. We aimed to develop a noninvasive way to measure airway permeability in asthma. Methods: Healthy controls and subjects with mild asthma inhaled dry powder mannitol in a dose-escalating manner on two separate occasions, stopping at 155 mg or 315 mg. Serum mannitol levels were measured at baseline and then 30, 90, and 150 min after mannitol inhalation. Mannitol absorption was compared with measurements of airflow obstruction (FEV1) and airway inflammation (FeNO). Results: Serum mannitol levels increased in a time- and dose-dependent manner in both healthy control and subjects with asthma. There were no significant differences in mannitol absorption when comparing healthy controls and subjects with asthma. Mannitol absorption did not correlate with markers of airway obstruction or inflammation. Conclusions: Measuring serum concentrations of mannitol after inhalation challenge can potentially provide insights into airway barrier function in asthma.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".