Negative Association of Smoking History With Clinically Manifest Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundThe etiology of sarcoidosis is still unknown and is likely related to a genetic susceptibility to unidentified environmental trigger(s). Our group and others have extensively described a specific phenotype of primarily Caucasian patients who have clinically manifest cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). In this study, we sought to explore whether smoking is associated with this specific phenotype of sarcoidosis.MethodsWe performed a case-control study. Cases with clinically manifest CS were prospectively enrolled in the Cardiac Sarcoidosis Multi-Center Prospective Cohort Study (CHASM-CS registry; NCT01477359) and answered a standardized smoking history questionnaire. Cases were matched 10:1 with controls from the Ontario Health Study. Pretreatment positron emission tomography scans with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose were compared for smokers vs nonsmokers.ResultsEighty-seven cases met the inclusion criteria. A total of 82 of 87 (94.3%) answered the questionnaire and were matched with 820 controls. A clear negative association of sarcoidosis and smoking was found, with 23 of 82 CS cases (28.0%) being current or ex-smokers, vs 392 of 820 controls (47.8%; P = 0.0006). CS patients with a smoking history had significantly less lifetime consumption (8.31 ± 9.20 pack-years) than the controls (15.34 ± 10.84 pack-years; P < 0.003). On 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan, the mean standardized uptake value of the left ventricle was 4.2 ± 8.98 in lifetime nonsmokers vs 2.89 ± 2.07 in patients with a smoking history (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsWe describe a strong negative association between smoking history and clinically manifest CS. Nonsmokers had more severe myocardial inflammation (greater mean standardized uptake value of the left ventricle) than did patients with a smoking history. Further research is needed to understand these associations and whether they have therapeutic potential.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".