MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Increased Lung Volume as a Potential Therapy for Bronchoconstriction in Asthma of Obesity

2021· article· en· W4244815488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Swati A. Bhatawadekar, Jason H. T. Bates, Ubong Peters, Nirav Daphtary, Kevin Hodgdon, David A. Kaminsky, Anne E. Dixon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchoconstrictionAsthmaMedicineObesityLungLung volumesVolume (thermodynamics)Intensive care medicineInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale: Late-onset non-allergic asthma in obesity is hypothesized to involve enhanced distal airway closure and air-trapping secondary to abnormally collapsible airway walls. If this is true, obese asthmatics might respond to therapies such as positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), which maintains airways open by elevating resting end-expiratory lung volume. We hypothesized that PEEP will both prevent the development of and reverse established bronchoconstriction in obese individuals with asthma. To test our hypothesis, we examined the effect of PEEP on airway mechanics during and after methacholine in obese participants with late-onset non-allergic asthma (LONA). We quantified bronchoconstriction using respiratory system impedance (Zrs). Methods: In obese patients with LONA asthma, we first determined the concentration of aerosolized methacholine causing a 20% decline in FEV 1 (PC 20 ). At four subsequent visits performed in a random order, Zrs was measured over 8 min using a modified flexiVent ventilator (Scireq, Montreal, Canada). Participants were given their PC 20 concentration of methacholine for the first 4.5 min, then methacholine was stopped while Zrs measurements continued for the next 3.5 min. During two visits, no PEEP was applied; at a third visit, PEEP 10 was applied both during and after methacholine (PEEP 10-10); at a forth visit, PEEP 10 was applied only after methacholine (PEEP 0-10). Measured Zrs was fit to a two-compartment series model of the respiratory system, providing values for the resistances and elastances of the central and peripheral compartments. We also obtained Ax and Ar as the areas under the curves of the imaginary and real parts, respectively, of Zrs vs. frequency. Ax and Ar provide integrative measures of the degree and heterogeneity of airway narrowing and derecruitment. Results: Twelve obese participants with LONA asthma (BMI: 42.88.7 kg/m 2 , 45.27.0 years, 8 females) completed the study protocol. PEEP 10 during methacholine reduced central and peripheral airway resistance and elastance, Ax, and Ar compared to no PEEP (Figure PEEP 10 after methacholine significantly reduced central resistance, Ax, and central and peripheral elastance. Conclusion: During methacholine administration, PEEP keeps both central and peripheral airways dilated and airspaces open, thereby mitigating bronchoconstriction. We therefore propose that PEEP serve as a potential therapy to prevent and reverse bronchoconstriction in obese individuals with 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→