Association of Bone Morphogenetic Proteins with Spinal Fusion in Ankylosing Spondylitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure serum concentrations of bone morphogenetic proteins (BMP) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and to investigate the relationship between BMP and clinical manifestations and radiographic changes. METHODS: We studied 60 consecutive AS patients with and 60 patients without spinal fusion. Spinal radiographs were assessed using the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Radiology Index (BASRI) and the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS). Spinal fusion was defined as the presence of total bony bridging between 2 adjacent vertebral bodies in either the lumbar or cervical spine. Serum levels of BMP were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: Patients with spinal fusion had higher serum levels of BMP-2 and BMP-4 than either the healthy controls or patients without spinal fusion (p < 0.001), but there was no difference between the latter 2 groups. Serum BMP-7, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were elevated in patients with spinal fusion compared with those without (p < 0.05). Serum BMP-4 and BMP-7 levels were higher in patients with hip involvement than in those without (p < 0.05). BMP-2 and BMP-4 levels had a significant correlation with spinal radiograph scores, especially for BASRI of the lumbar spine (r = 0.356 and 0.348, respectively, p < 0.001). CRP showed a significant correlation with spine BASRI and mSASSS scores (r = 0.261 and 0.260, respectively, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Rising levels of BMP in AS patients with spinal fusion and the positive correlation between BMP and spinal radiograph scores indicate that BMP may play a role in the process of spinal ankylosis. Serum levels of BMP may reflect radiographic progression of the spine and hip joints.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".