Association of vaccination status and immunosuppression with mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with fibrotic interstitial lung disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited data exploring the outcome following SARS-CoV-2 infection in fibrotic interstitial lung disease (fILD). Our goal was to determine the association of vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 with both SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent 90-day mortality in fILD. Our second objective was to determine the association of immunosuppressive use with both SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent 90-day mortality in fILD. METHODS: Patients with fILD enrolled in the Canadian Registry for Pulmonary Fibrosis with comprehensive access to data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and PCR-confirmed infection were included. Associations of vaccination status and current immunosuppressant use with SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent 90-day mortality were tested using Fisher's exact test and subsequently multivariable logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, pre-identified comorbidities, forced vital capacity and diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide. RESULTS: Of 1452 total patients with fILD, 138 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. On adjusted analysis, vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a 60% reduction in the odds of infection (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67 p<0.001) and a 97% reduction in the odds of 90-day mortality following infection (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.0007 to 0.26, p=0.01). SARS-CoV-2 was diagnosed in 13% of patients on an immunosuppressant and 9% of those not (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.1, p=0.04). Immunosuppressant use was not associated with 90-day mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection on adjusted analysis. CONCLUSION: In patients with fILD, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 was associated with decreased frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent 90-day mortality, while current use of immunosuppressive medication was associated with risk of infection but only a trend for subsequent 90-day mortality.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".