MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392298082 · doi:10.1183/13993003.00061-2024

Revised ISHAM-ABPA working group clinical practice guidelines for diagnosing, classifying and treating allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis/mycoses

2024· article· en· W4392298082 on OpenAlexaff
Ritesh Agarwal, Inderpaul Singh Sehgal, Valliappan Muthu, David W. Denning, Arunaloke Chakrabarti, Soundappan Kathirvel, Mandeep Garg, Shivaprakash M. Rudramurthy, Sahajal Dhooria, Darius Armstrong‐James, Koichiro Asano, Jean‐Pierre Gangneux, Sanjay H. Chotirmall, Helmut J.F. Salzer, James D. Chalmers, Cendrine Godet, Marcus Joest, Iain Page, Parameswaran Nair, P Arjun, Raja Dhar, Kana Ram Jat, Geethu Joe, Uma Maheswari Krishnaswamy, Joseph L. Mathew, Venkata Nagarjuna Maturu, Anant Mohan, Alok Nath, Dharmesh Patel, Jayanthi Savio, Puneet Saxena, Rajeev Soman, Balamugesh Thangakunam, Caroline Baxter, Felix Bongomin, William J. Calhoun, Oliver A. Cornely, John Aubrey Douglass, Chris Kosmidis, Jacques F. Meis, Richard B. Moss, Alessandro C. Pasqualotto, Danila Seidel, Rosanne Sprute, Kuruswamy Thurai Prasad, Ashutosh N. Aggarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcGill University
FundersGrifolsAstellas Foundation for Research on Metabolic DisordersAstellas PharmaRegeneron PharmaceuticalsTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesBioCrystGilead SciencesShionogiSanofiGlaxoSmithKlineCidara TherapeuticsAstraZenecaPfizer
KeywordsMedicineAllergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosisAspergillosisClinical PracticePulmonary aspergillosisDermatologyImmunologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The International Society for Human and Animal Mycology (ISHAM) working group proposed recommendations for managing allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) a decade ago. There is a need to update these recommendations due to advances in diagnostics and therapeutics. Methods An international expert group was convened to develop guidelines for managing ABPA (caused by Aspergillus spp.) and allergic bronchopulmonary mycosis (ABPM; caused by fungi other than Aspergillus spp.) in adults and children using a modified Delphi method (two online rounds and one in-person meeting). We defined consensus as ≥70% agreement or disagreement. The terms “recommend” and “suggest” are used when the consensus was ≥70% and <70%, respectively. Results We recommend screening for A. fumigatus sensitisation using fungus-specific IgE in all newly diagnosed asthmatic adults at tertiary care but only difficult-to-treat asthmatic children. We recommend diagnosing ABPA in those with predisposing conditions or compatible clinico-radiological presentation, with a mandatory demonstration of fungal sensitisation and serum total IgE ≥500 IU·mL −1 and two of the following: fungal-specific IgG, peripheral blood eosinophilia or suggestive imaging. ABPM is considered in those with an ABPA-like presentation but normal A. fumigatus -IgE. Additionally, diagnosing ABPM requires repeated growth of the causative fungus from sputum. We do not routinely recommend treating asymptomatic ABPA patients. We recommend oral prednisolone or itraconazole monotherapy for treating acute ABPA (newly diagnosed or exacerbation), with prednisolone and itraconazole combination only for treating recurrent ABPA exacerbations. We have devised an objective multidimensional criterion to assess treatment response. Conclusion We have framed consensus guidelines for diagnosing, classifying and treating ABPA/M for patient care and research.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0140.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0080.005
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations221
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207