MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302305116 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.980942

Characterization of chronic lung allograft dysfunction phenotypes using spectral and intrabreath oscillometry

2022· article· en· W4302305116 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anne Fu, Anastasiia Vasileva, Nour Hanafi, Natalia V. Belousova, Joyce Wu, Sarada Sriya Rajyam, Clodagh M. Ryan, Zoltán Hantos, Chung‐Wai Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLung Health FoundationHungarian Scientific Research FundUniversity of TorontoCanadian Lung Association
KeywordsMedicineLung transplantationCardiologySpirometryPulmonary function testingBronchiolitis obliteransInternal medicineLungRestrictive lung diseaseAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) is the major cause of death beyond 2 years after lung transplantation and develops in 50% of all patients by 5 years post-transplant. CLAD is diagnosed on the basis of a sustained drop of 20% for at least 3 months in the forced expiratory volume (FEV 1 ), compared to the best baseline value achieved post-transplant. CLAD presents as two main phenotypes: bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) is more common and has better prognosis than restrictive allograft syndrome (RAS). Respiratory oscillometry is a different modality of lung function testing that is highly sensitive to lung mechanics. The current study investigated whether spectral and intrabreath oscillometry can differentiate between CLAD-free, BOS- and RAS-CLAD at CLAD onset, i.e., at the time of the initial 20% drop in the FEV 1 . Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 263 double lung transplant recipients who underwent paired testing with oscillometry and spirometry at the Toronto General Pulmonary Function Laboratory from 2017 to 2022 was conducted. All pulmonary function testing and CLAD diagnostics were performed following international guidelines. Statistical analysis was conducted using multiple comparisons. Findings: The RAS ( n = 6) spectral oscillometry pattern differs from CLAD-free ( n = 225) by right-ward shift of reactance curve similar to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis whereas BOS ( n = 32) has a pattern similar to obstructive lung disease. Significant differences were found in most spectral and intrabreath parameters between BOS, RAS, and time-matched CLAD-free patients. Post-hoc analysis revealed these differences were primarily driven by BOS instead of RAS. While no differences were found between CLAD-free and RAS patients with regards to spectral oscillometry, the intrabreath metric of reactance at end-inspiration (XeI) was significantly different ( p < 0.05). BOS and RAS were differentiated by spectral oscillometry measure R5, and intrabreath resistance at end expiration, ReE ( p < 0.05 for both). Conclusion: Both spectral and intrabreath oscillometry can differentiate BOS-CLAD from CLAD-free states while intrabreath oscillometry, specifically XeI, can uniquely distinguish RAS-CLAD from CLAD-free. Spectral and intrabreath oscillometry offer complementary information regarding lung mechanics in CLAD patients to help distinguish the two phenotypes and could prove useful in prognostication.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations31
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207