MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Unsupervised Machine-learned Discovery of Quantitative Airway Tree Subtypes and Their Association With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Endpoints: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis Lung Study

2025· article· en· W4410273993 on OpenAlexaff
Seema Naik, Elsa D. Angelini, Yanping Sun, E.A. Hoffman, Norrina B. Allen, A. Bertoni, Ani Manichaikul, O. O'Driscoll, James S. Pankow, WS Post, Karol E. Watson, Andrew F. Laine, R. Graham Barr, B.M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary diseaseAirwayDiseaseAtherosclerotic cardiovascular diseaseIntensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract RATIONALE: Central airway tree topology is established in utero and varies in the general population. Visual airway tree assessment restricted to lower lobe segmental anatomy has identified absent and accessory airways in approximately 25% of adults and these variants are associated with higher chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) prevalence later in life, including in non-smoking study participants. This study applied unsupervised machine-learning to the full CT-resolved airway tree to discover novel quantitative airway tree subtypes (QATS) and evaluated the association of QATS with COPD endpoints. METHODS: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) Lung Study includes community-dwelling adults from six U.S. sites that underwent full-lung CT at suspended inspiration, spirometry, symptom questionnaires, genotyping and follow-up for respiratory hospitalization and/or death defined by primary diagnostic code. QATS were identified by clustering participant-level deep-learned representations of airway tree structures segmented from CT. We repeated clustering on five subsets of MESA Exam 5 (80% each) and quantified QATS reproducibility using the Rand Index. QATS differences in lung structure (mean airway lumen diameter, percent wall area, branch density, and geometric complexity), and COPD endpoints (forced expired volume in 1-sec / forced vital capacity [FEV1/FVC]<0.70, Medical Research Council [MRC] dyspnea rating >1, and rate of primary respiratory-related hospitalization or death) were assessed among all participants and among never smokers using regression models to adjust for age, sex, height, body mass index, race-ethnicity, total lung volume, cigarette smoking status and pack-years. RESULTS: Among 2,588 participants (mean±SD age: 69.4±9.3 years, 54% female, 51% ever smokers with 19±24 pack-years), four QATS clusters were identified (Table) and were 95% reproducible. Compared with QATS A (prevalence 30.3%; reference cluster), QATS B (prevalence 26.4%) was associated with higher prevalence of airflow obstruction, dyspnea and a higher rate of CLRD hospitalization or death among all participants and among never-smokers; QATS C (prevalence 22.6%) was associated with higher airflow obstruction prevalence but similar prevalence of dyspnea and CLRD events; and QATS D (prevalence 20.8%) was associated with higher airflow obstruction prevalence and percent of emphysema-like lung but similar dyspnea prevalence and rate of CLRD events. CONCLUSION: Unsupervised machine-learning identified four common quantitative airway tree subtypes (QATS) that differed with respect to COPD endpoints, including, as previously, participants who never smoked. These findings suggest that central airway tree topology varies considerably in the general population and is associated with distinct COPD phenotypes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→