Lack of association of Aspergillus colonization with the development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome in lung transplant recipients: An international cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) is a major limitation in the long-term survival of lung transplant recipients (LTRs). However, the risk factors in the development of BOS remain undetermined. We conducted an international cohort study of LTRs to assess whether Aspergillus colonization with large or small conidia is a risk factor for the development of BOS. METHODS: Consecutive LTRs from January 2005 to December 2008 were evaluated. Rates of BOS and associated risk factors were recorded at 4 years. International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation criteria were used to define fungal and other infections. A Cox proportional-hazards-model was constructed to assess the association between Aspergillus colonization and the development of BOS controlling for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 747 LTRs were included. The cumulative incidence of BOS at 4 years after transplant was 33% (250 of 747). Additionally, 22% of LTRs experienced Aspergillus colonization after transplantation. Aspergillus colonization with either large (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3-1.2, p = 0.12) or small conidia (HR = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.6-1.4, p = 0.74) was not associated with the development of BOS. Factors associated with increased risk of development of BOS were the male gender (HR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.8, p = 0.02) and episodes of acute rejection (1-2 episodes, HR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1-2.1, p = 0.014; 3-4 episodes, HR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.0-2.6, p = 0.036; >4 episodes, HR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.1-4.3, p = 0.02), whereas tacrolimus use was associated with reduced risk of BOS (HR = 0.6, 95% CI = 0.5-0.9, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude from this large multicenter cohort of lung transplant patients, that Aspergillus colonization with large or small conidia did not show an association with the development of BOS.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".