Determinants of impaired lung function and lung cancer prediction among never-smokers in the UK Biobank cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impaired lung health represents a significant burden on global health, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer. Given its global health impact, it is important to understand the determinants of impaired lung function and its relation to lung cancer risk independent of smoking. However, to date, no study has evaluated determinants of impaired lung function in a cohort exclusively of never-smokers, who also represent a growing proportion of all lung cancers. METHODS: A total of 222,274 never-smokers with reproducible spirograms were identified in the UK Biobank population-based cohort and included in the analysis. Baseline volumetric measures of lung function, including forced expiratory volume in 1-s (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC), were used to define lung function impairment. Determinants of impaired lung function were evaluated using Poisson regression with robust variance estimation. The added value of lung function in lung cancer prediction was evaluated using Fine and Gray regression accounting for the competing risk of all-cause mortality. FINDINGS: ), and overweight, after adjustment for other important risk factors. We observed modest improvement in discrimination by adding lung function to our lung cancer prediction model for never-smokers. The highest optimism-corrected AUC at 3 (0·700, 95% CI: 0·654-0·734) and 5 years (0·694, 95% CI: 0·658-0·736) included FEV1 (% of GLI predicted FEV1), while the highest AUC at 7 years was based on the inclusion of FEV1/FVC (0·722, 95% CI: 0·687-0·762). INTERPRETATION: We identified several modifiable risk factors associated with increased risk of lung function impairment among lifetime never-smokers in UKB. We achieved moderate discrimination for lung cancer risk-prediction for never-smokers, and found modest improvement with the inclusion of lung function. FUND: This study was supported by a Canada Research Chair to RJH.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".