Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38861171›Full record

ArticleLung2024

Pulmonary Fibrosis Diagnosis and Disease Progression Detected Via Hair Metabolome Analysis.

Hunter A Miller, Sally Suliman, Hermann B Frieboes

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Lung, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hunter A MillerDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, Lutz Hall 419, Louisville, KY, 40292, USA.
Sally Suliman *Division of Pulmonary Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Hermann B Frieboes *Department of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, Lutz Hall 419, Louisville, KY, 40292, USA. hbfrie01@louisville.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFibrotic interstitial lung disease is often identified late due to non-specific symptoms, inadequate access to specialist care, and clinical unawareness precluding proper and timely treatment. Biopsy histological analysis is definitive but rarely performed due to its invasiveness. Diagnosis typically relies on high-resolution computed tomography, while disease progression is evaluated via frequent pulmonary function testing. This study tested the hypothesis that pulmonary fibrosis diagnosis and progression could be non-invasively and accurately evaluated from the hair metabolome, with the longer-term goal to minimize patient discomfort.

methodsHair specimens collected from pulmonary fibrosis patients (n = 56) and healthy subjects (n = 14) were processed for metabolite extraction using 2DLC/MS-MS, and data were analyzed via machine learning. Metabolomic data were used to train machine learning classification models tuned via a rigorous combination of cross validation, feature selection, and testing with a hold-out dataset to evaluate classifications of diseased vs. healthy subjects and stable vs. progressed disease.

resultsPrediction of pulmonary fibrosis vs. healthy achieved AUROC

conclusionThis study provides novel evidence that pulmonary fibrosis diagnosis and progression may in principle be evaluated from the hair metabolome. Longer term, this approach may facilitate non-invasive and accurate detection and monitoring of fibrotic lung diseases.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionHairMetabolomePulmonary FibrosisAdultAgedCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMetabolomicsMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsHair metabolomeIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisInterstitial lung diseaseMachine learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.