Transient ischemic attacks characterized by RNA profiles in blood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Transient ischemic attacks (TIA) are common. Though systemic inflammation and thrombosis are associated with TIA, further study may provide insight into TIA pathophysiology and possibly lead to the development of treatments specifically targeted to TIA. We sought to determine whether gene expression profiles in blood could better characterize the proinflammatory and procoagulant states in TIA patients. METHODS: RNA expression in blood of TIA patients (n = 26) was compared to vascular risk factor control subjects without symptomatic cardiovascular disease (n = 26) using Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 microarrays. Differentially expressed genes in TIA were identified by analysis of covariance and evaluated with cross-validation and functional analyses. RESULTS: Patients with TIA had different patterns of gene expression compared to controls. There were 480 probe sets, corresponding to 449 genes, differentially expressed between TIA and controls (false discovery rate correction for multiple comparisons, p ≤ 0.05, absolute fold change ≥1.2). These genes were associated with systemic inflammation, platelet activation, and prothrombin activation. Hierarchical cluster analysis of the identified genes suggested the presence of 2 patterns of RNA expression in patients with TIA. Prediction analysis identified a set of 34 genes that discriminated TIA from controls with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity. CONCLUSION: Patients with recent TIA have differences of gene expression in blood compared to controls. The 2 gene expression profiles associated with TIA suggests heterogeneous responses between subjects with TIA that may provide insight into cause, risk of stroke, and other TIA pathophysiology.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".