How reliable and robust are current biomarkers for copper status?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cu is an essential nutrient for man, but can be toxic if intakes are too high. In sensitive populations, marginal over- or under-exposure can have detrimental effects. Malnourished children, the elderly, and pregnant or lactating females may be susceptible for Cu deficiency. Cu status and exposure in the population can currently not be easily measured, as neither plasma Cu nor plasma cuproenzymes reflect Cu status precisely. Some blood markers (such as ceruloplasmin) indicate severe Cu depletion, but do not inversely respond to Cu excess, and are not suitable to indicate marginal states. A biomarker of Cu is needed that is sensitive to small changes in Cu status, and that responds to Cu excess as well as deficiency. Such a marker will aid in monitoring Cu status in large populations, and will help to avoid chronic health effects (for example, liver damage in chronic toxicity, osteoporosis, loss of collagen stability, or increased susceptibility to infections in deficiency). The advent of high-throughput technologies has enabled us to screen for potential biomarkers in the whole proteome of a cell, not excluding markers that have no direct link to Cu. Further, this screening allows us to search for a whole group of proteins that, in combination, reflect Cu status. The present review emphasises the need to find sensitive biomarkers for Cu, examines potential markers of Cu status already available, and discusses methods to identify a novel suite of biomarkers.
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 | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".