ArticleERJ open research2026
Radiographic severity and treatment optimisation in
Article in ERJ open research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We developed a chest radiography (CXR) scoring system using a deep neural network to quantify the severity of Methods: We analysed chest radiographs obtained at treatment initiation in patients who began therapy for MAC-PD at Seoul National University Hospital between 1 January 2011, and 31 August 2024. Patients were classified into mild or extensive disease groups based on a CXR score cut-off of 4.0. The impact of macrolide/ethambutol-based initial treatment regimens, alternative intensified regimens (including inhaled amikacin or clofazimine), and intensified regimens (including intravenous amikacin) on culture conversion was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The study comprised 541 patients (299 and 242 with mild and extensive disease types, respectively). Alternative intensified regimens were used in 103 patients (19.0%), and intensified regimens were used in 25 patients (4.6%). Culture conversion was achieved in 450 patients (83.2%), with no significant differences between the mild (81.6%) and extensive (85.1%) groups (p=0.277). In mild disease, neither alternative intensified regimens (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.19) nor intensified regimens (aHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.53-1.89) were associated with improved culture conversion. In contrast, in extensive disease, use of intensified regimens (aHR 1.90, 95% CI 1.12-3.22) was associated with a higher likelihood of culture conversion. Conclusion: CXR score-based disease stratification may guide individualised treatment strategy in patients with MAC-PD.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.