MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3095862618 · doi:10.2196/23582

A Machine Learning Explanation of the Pathogen-Immune Relationship of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), and a Model to Predict Immunity and Therapeutic Opportunity: A Comparative Effectiveness Research Study

2020· article· en· W3095862618 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric Luellen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIRx Med · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAsymptomaticImmunityImmune systemMedicineImmunologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Approximately 80% of those infected with COVID-19 are immune. They are asymptomatic unknown carriers who can still infect those with whom they come into contact. Understanding what makes them immune could inform public health policies as to who needs to be protected and why, and possibly lead to a novel treatment for those who cannot, or will not, be vaccinated once a vaccine is available. OBJECTIVE: The primary objectives of this study were to learn if machine learning could identify patterns in the pathogen-host immune relationship that differentiate or predict COVID-19 symptom immunity and, if so, which ones and at what levels. The secondary objective was to learn if machine learning could take such differentiators to build a model that could predict COVID-19 immunity with clinical accuracy. The tertiary purpose was to learn about the relevance of other immune factors. METHODS: This was a comparative effectiveness research study on 53 common immunological factors using machine learning on clinical data from 74 similarly grouped Chinese COVID-19-positive patients, 37 of whom were symptomatic and 37 asymptomatic. The setting was a single-center primary care hospital in the Wanzhou District of China. Immunological factors were measured in patients who were diagnosed as SARS-CoV-2 positive by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the 14 days before observations were recorded. The median age of the 37 asymptomatic patients was 41 years (range 8-75 years); 22 were female, 15 were male. For comparison, 37 RT-PCR test-positive patients were selected and matched to the asymptomatic group by age, comorbidities, and sex. Machine learning models were trained and compared to understand the pathogen-immune relationship and predict who was immune to COVID-19 and why, using the statistical programming language R. RESULTS: When stem cell growth factor-beta (SCGF-β) was included in the machine learning analysis, a decision tree and extreme gradient boosting algorithms classified and predicted COVID-19 symptom immunity with 100% accuracy. When SCGF-β was excluded, a random-forest algorithm classified and predicted asymptomatic and symptomatic cases of COVID-19 with 94.8% AUROC (area under the receiver operating characteristic) curve accuracy (95% CI 90.17%-100%). In total, 34 common immune factors have statistically significant associations with COVID-19 symptoms (all c<.05), and 19 immune factors appear to have no statistically significant association. CONCLUSIONS: The primary outcome was that asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 could be identified by three distinct immunological factors and levels: SCGF-β (>127,637), interleukin-16 (IL-16) (>45), and macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF) (>57). The secondary study outcome was the suggestion that stem-cell therapy with SCGF-β may be a novel treatment for COVID-19. Individuals with an SCGF-β level >127,637, or an IL-16 level >45 and an M-CSF level >57, appear to be predictively immune to COVID-19 100% and 94.8% (AUROC) of the time, respectively. Testing levels of these three immunological factors may be a valuable tool at the point of care for managing and preventing outbreaks. Further, stem-cell therapy via SCGF-β and M-CSF appear to be promising novel therapeutics for patients with COVID-19.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,417
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,512

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,410
Tête enseignante GPT0,479
Écart entre enseignants0,069 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIRx MedMême sujetSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchTravaux en français237 207