Prediction of Cardioembolic, Arterial, and Lacunar Causes of Cryptogenic Stroke by Gene Expression and Infarct Location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The cause of ischemic stroke remains unclear, or cryptogenic, in as many as 35% of patients with stroke. Not knowing the cause of stroke restricts optimal implementation of prevention therapy and limits stroke research. We demonstrate how gene expression profiles in blood can be used in conjunction with a measure of infarct location on neuroimaging to predict a probable cause in cryptogenic stroke. METHODS: The cause of cryptogenic stroke was predicted using previously described profiles of differentially expressed genes characteristic of patients with cardioembolic, arterial, and lacunar stroke. RNA was isolated from peripheral blood of 131 cryptogenic strokes and compared with profiles derived from 149 strokes of known cause. Each sample was run on Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 microarrays. Cause of cryptogenic stroke was predicted using gene expression in blood and infarct location. RESULTS: Cryptogenic strokes were predicted to be 58% cardioembolic, 18% arterial, 12% lacunar, and 12% unclear etiology. Cryptogenic stroke of predicted cardioembolic etiology had more prior myocardial infarction and higher CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores compared with stroke of predicted arterial etiology. Predicted lacunar strokes had higher systolic and diastolic blood pressures and lower National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale compared with predicted arterial and cardioembolic strokes. Cryptogenic strokes of unclear predicted etiology were less likely to have a prior transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression in conjunction with a measure of infarct location can predict a probable cause in cryptogenic strokes. Predicted groups require further evaluation to determine whether relevant clinical, imaging, or therapeutic differences exist for each group.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".