Association between occupational exposure to irritant agents and a distinct asthma endotype in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim The biological mechanisms of work-related asthma induced by irritants remain unclear. We investigated the associations between occupational exposure to irritants and respiratory endotypes previously identified among never asthmatics (NA) and current asthmatics (CA) integrating clinical characteristics and biomarkers related to oxidative stress and inflammation. Methods We used cross-sectional data from 999 adults (mean 45 years old, 46% men) from the case-control and familial Epidemiological study on the Genetics and Environments of Asthma (EGEA) study. Five respiratory endotypes have been identified using a cluster-based approach: NA1 (n=463) asymptomatic, NA2 (n=169) with respiratory symptoms, CA1 (n=50) with active treated adult-onset asthma, poor lung function, high blood neutrophil counts and high fluorescent oxidation products level, CA2 (n=203) with mild middle-age asthma, rhinitis and low immunoglobulin E level, and CA3 (n=114) with inactive/mild untreated allergic childhood-onset asthma. Occupational exposure to irritants during the current or last held job was assessed by the updated occupational asthma-specific job-exposure matrix (levels of exposure: no/medium/high). Associations between irritants and each respiratory endotype (NA1 asymptomatic as reference) were studied using logistic regressions adjusted for age, sex and smoking status. Results Prevalence of high occupational exposure to irritants was 7% in NA1, 6% in NA2, 16% in CA1, 7% in CA2 and 10% in CA3. High exposure to irritants was associated with CA1 (adjusted OR aOR, (95% CI) 2.7 (1.0 to 7.3)). Exposure to irritants was not significantly associated with other endotypes (aOR range: 0.8 to 1.5). Conclusion Occupational exposure to irritants was associated with a distinct respiratory endotype suggesting oxidative stress and neutrophilic inflammation as potential associated biological mechanisms.
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) | 0.001 | 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".