Alveolar cell composition in interstitial lung disease and the development of a pulmonary progressive fibrosing phenotype: a retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immunological bronchoalveolar lavage (iBAL) is a frequently employed diagnostic tool in interstitial lung disease (ILD). The association between iBAL cellular composition and disease progression remains elusive. We evaluated whether the alveolar cellular composition at initial diagnosis is predictive of the development of progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) in patients with ILD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 111 patients diagnosed with ILD who underwent iBAL for diagnostic purposes between January 2018 and January 2023 was conducted. The identification of PPF was based on the criteria outlined in the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT clinical practice guidelines. Clinical data, pulmonary function tests, radiological imaging, and BAL cellular composition were collected. Groups were compared using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank sum test. Linear mixed-effect modelling was used to assess the association between baseline cell composition and longitudinal lung function decline. RESULTS: A total of 33.3% of patients exhibited a PPF phenotype. A significant association between baseline iBAL CD4 + and CD8 + T cell percentages and forced vital capacity (FVC) decline within the first year was observed. Other cell types were not associated with ILD progression within one-year of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CD4 + and CD8 + T cell percentages significantly correlated with FVC changes in patients with fibrotic ILD. No further associations were found between the baseline iBAL cellular profiles and disease progression. These findings suggest that baseline iBAL cellular profiles may hold some promise in predicting fibrotic ILD disease progression. Further (prospective) studies using larger cohorts may be needed to elucidate the association between the cellular composition of iBAL fluid and pulmonary fibrosis progression.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".