Survival After Lung Transplantation for Chronic Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis: Results From a Large International Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
inhalation is the primary cause of hypersensitivity pneumonitis, a form of interstitial pneumonia. The chronic form of hypersensitivity pneumonitis leads to progressive loss of respiratory function; lung transplantation is the only therapeutic option for chronically ill patients. The ESTS Lung Transplantation Working Group conducted a retrospective multicentred cohort study to increase the body of knowledge available on this rare indication for lung transplantation. Data were collected for every patient who underwent lung transplant for hypersensitivity pneumonitis in participating centres between December 1996 and October 2019. Primary outcome was overall survival; secondary outcome was freedom from chronic lung allograft dysfunction. A total of 114 patients were enrolled from 9 centres. Almost 90% of patients were diagnosed with hypersensitivity pneumonitis before transplantation, yet the antigen responsible for the infection was identified in only 25% of cases. Eighty per cent of the recipients received induction therapy. Survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 85%, 75%, and 70%, respectively. 85% of the patients who survived 90 days after transplantation were free from chronic lung allograft dysfunction after 3 years. The given study presents a large cohort of HP patients who underwent lung transplants. Overall survival rate is higher in transplanted hypersensitivity pneumonitis patients than in those suffering from any other interstitial lung diseases. Hypersensitivity pneumonitis patients are good candidates for lung transplantation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".