Determination of Burn Patient Outcome by Large-Scale Quantitative Discovery Proteomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Emerging proteomics techniques can be used to establish proteomic outcome signatures and to identify candidate biomarkers for survival following traumatic injury. We applied high-resolution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry and multiplex cytokine analysis to profile the plasma proteome of survivors and nonsurvivors of massive burn injury to determine the proteomic survival signature following a major burn injury. DESIGN: Proteomic discovery study. SETTING: Five burn hospitals across the United States. PATIENTS: Thirty-two burn patients (16 nonsurvivors and 16 survivors), 19-89 years old, were admitted within 96 hours of injury to the participating hospitals with burns covering more than 20% of the total body surface area and required at least one surgical intervention. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We found differences in circulating levels of 43 proteins involved in the acute-phase response, hepatic signaling, the complement cascade, inflammation, and insulin resistance. Thirty-two of the proteins identified were not previously known to play a role in the response to burn. Interleukin-4, interleukin-8, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, monocyte chemotactic protein-1, and β2-microglobulin correlated well with survival and may serve as clinical biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the utility of these techniques for establishing proteomic survival signatures and for use as a discovery tool to identify candidate biomarkers for survival. This is the first clinical application of a high-throughput, large-scale liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based quantitative plasma proteomic approach for biomarker discovery for the prediction of patient outcome following burn, trauma, or critical illness.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".