MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293678296 · doi:10.1186/s12931-022-02131-5

Utility of bile acids in large airway bronchial wash versus bronchoalveolar lavage as biomarkers of microaspiration in lung transplant recipients: a retrospective cohort study

2022· article· en· W4293678296 on OpenAlexafffund
Chen Yang Kevin Zhang, Musawir Ahmed, Ella Huszti, Liran Levy, Sarah Hunter, K. Boonstra, Sajad Moshkelgosha, Andrew T. Sage, S. Azad, R. Ghany, Jonathan Yeung, Oscar M. Crespin, L.G. Singer, Shaf Keshavjee, Tereza Martinu

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiratory Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBronchoalveolar lavageMedicineLung transplantationLungGastroenterologyInternal medicineGlycocholic acidBile acidImmunologyCholic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is a key tool in respiratory medicine for sampling the distal airways. BAL bile acids are putative biomarkers of pulmonary microaspiration, which is associated with poor outcomes after lung transplantation. Compared to BAL, large airway bronchial wash (LABW) samples the tracheobronchial space where bile acids may be measurable at more clinically relevant levels. We assessed whether LABW bile acids, compared to BAL bile acids, are more strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes in lung transplant recipients. METHODS: Concurrently obtained BAL and LABW at 3 months post-transplant from a retrospective cohort of 61 lung transplant recipients were analyzed for taurocholic acid (TCA), glycocholic acid (GCA), and cholic acid by mass spectrometry and 10 inflammatory proteins by multiplex immunoassay. Associations between bile acids with inflammatory proteins and acute lung allograft dysfunction were assessed using Spearman correlation and logistic regression, respectively. Time to chronic lung allograft dysfunction and death were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Most bile acids and inflammatory proteins were higher in LABW than in BAL. LABW bile acids correlated with inflammatory proteins within and between sample type. LABW TCA and GCA were associated with acute lung allograft dysfunction (OR = 1.368; 95%CI = 1.036-1.806; P = 0.027, OR = 1.064; 95%CI = 1.009-1.122; P = 0.022, respectively). No bile acids were associated with chronic lung allograft dysfunction. Adjusted for risk factors, LABW TCA and GCA predicted death (HR = 1.513; 95%CI = 1.014-2.256; P = 0.042, HR = 1.597; 95%CI = 1.078-2.366; P = 0.020, respectively). Patients with LABW TCA in the highest tertile had worse survival compared to all others. CONCLUSIONS: LABW bile acids are more strongly associated than BAL bile acids with inflammation, acute lung allograft dysfunction, and death in lung transplant recipients. Collection of LABW may be useful in the evaluation of microaspiration in lung transplantation and other respiratory diseases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespiratory ResearchSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207