Increased day‐to‐day fluctuations in exhaled breath profiles after a rhinovirus challenge in asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early detection/prediction of flare-ups in asthma, commonly triggered by viruses, would enable timely treatment. Previous studies on exhaled breath analysis by electronic nose (eNose) technology could discriminate between stable and unstable episodes of asthma, using single/few time-points. To investigate its monitoring properties during these episodes, we examined day-to-day fluctuations in exhaled breath profiles, before and after a rhinovirus-16 (RV16) challenge, in healthy and asthmatic adults. METHODS: In this proof-of-concept study, 12 atopic asthmatic and 12 non-atopic healthy adults were prospectively followed thrice weekly, 60 days before, and 30 days after a RV16 challenge. Exhaled breath profiles were detected using an eNose, consisting of 7 different sensors. Per sensor, individual means were calculated using pre-challenge visits. Absolute deviations (|%|) from this baseline were derived for all visits. Within-group comparisons were tested with Mann-Whitney U tests and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Finally, Spearman's correlations between the total change in eNose deviations and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), cold-like symptoms, and pro-inflammatory cytokines were examined. RESULTS: Both groups had significantly increased eNose fluctuations post-challenge, which in asthma started 1 day post-challenge, before the onset of symptoms. Discrimination between pre- and post-challenge reached an area under the ROC curve of 0.82 (95% CI = 0.65-0.99) in healthy and 0.97 (95% CI = 0.91-1.00) in asthmatic adults. The total change in eNose deviations moderately correlated with IL-8 and TNFα (ρ ≈ .50-0.60) in asthmatics. CONCLUSION: Electronic nose fluctuations rapidly increase after a RV16 challenge, with distinct differences between healthy and asthmatic adults, suggesting that this technology could be useful in monitoring virus-driven unstable episodes 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 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".