MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410431921 · doi:10.1183/23120541.01317-2024

Ventilation defect burden predicts lung cancer resection outcomes

2025· article· en· W4410431921 on OpenAlexaff
Nisarg Radadia, Eldar Priel, Yonni Friedlander, Norman B. Konyer, Chynna Huang, Mobin Jamal, Troy Farncombe, Christopher Marriott, Christian Finley, John Agzarian, Michael D. Noseworthy, Parameswaran Nair, Yaron Shargall, Sarah Svenningsen

Bibliographic record

VenueERJ Open Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerIntensive care medicineResectionLungVentilation (architecture)SurgeryOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Abnormal ventilation prior to lung cancer resection has not been investigated using modern ventilation imaging modalities and may better predict postoperative outcomes than guideline-recommended lung function tests. Our objective was to quantify the burden of ventilation defects observed using Technegas single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and 129 Xe magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before lung cancer resection, and to evaluate their association with postoperative pulmonary complications and length of hospital stay. Methods This was a prospective, 6-week, observational study of adults undergoing lung cancer resection at a single centre. Before lung resection, participants underwent Technegas-SPECT, 129 Xe-MRI, spirometry and measurement of diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide. Preoperative ventilation defect burden was quantified by the Technegas-SPECT and 129 Xe-MRI ventilation defect percent (VDP). Predictors of complications during the 4-week postoperative period and length of hospital stay were evaluated by logistic and linear regression. Results Abnormal ventilation was observed preoperatively by Technegas-SPECT and 129 Xe-MRI for 58% (60 of 103) and 73% (74 of 102) of participants, respectively. Preoperative VDPs were higher for participants with postoperative complications compared with those without (SPECT: p=0.01; MRI: p=0.0006) and correlated with length of hospital stay (SPECT: r=0.44, p<0.0001; MRI: r=0.51, p<0.0001). Multivariable models revealed preoperative VDP to be the strongest predictor of postoperative complications (SPECT: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.11, p=0.02; MRI: OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.21, p=0.02) and length of hospital stay (SPECT: β=0.16, p<0.001; MRI: β=0.23, p<0.001). Conclusion Abnormal ventilation is prevalent prior to lung cancer resection and may be a stronger predictor of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay than standard clinical lung function measures.

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)0.001
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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.418 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueERJ Open ResearchSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207