Assessment of endothelin and copeptin as biomarkers for vasovagal syncope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of vasovagal syncope continues to be difficult despite the use of accurate histories, tilt testing and implantable loop recorders. A circulating biomarker might be useful to facilitate diagnoses. Both endothelin-1 and vasopressin are increased during positive tilt tests resulting in syncope. Copeptin is a stable cleavage product of vasopressin formation. We conducted a pilot study to assess the utility of endothelin-1 and copeptin as circulating biomarkers of vasovagal syncope. METHODS: Three populations were studied: syncope patients, epilepsy patients and controls. Vasovagal syncope diagnosis was ascertained with the Calgary Syncope Score and epilepsy diagnosis was confirmed with EEG. Plasma levels of endothelin-1 were measured using by ELISA and copeptin levels were determined using an EIA kit. RESULTS: Asymptomatic control subjects had mean age 35 ± 11 years (7/22 male); epileptic subjects had mean age 32 ± 7 years (4/15 male); and syncope subjects had mean age 33 ± 16 years (4 of 21 male). Circulating plasma levels of endothelin-1 and copeptin were no different among the three groups. Mean concentrations of endothelin-1 were as follows: syncope, 23 ± 32 pg/mL; controls, 21 ± 17 pg/mL; and epileptics, 18 ± 12 pg/mL. Mean concentrations of copeptin were as follows: syncope, 1·29 ± 0·79 ng/mL; controls, 1·25 ± 0·79 ng/mL; and seizures, 1·23 ± 0·45 ng/mL. There were no significant correlations between syncope frequency and copeptin or endothelin-1 levels. CONCLUSION: Circulating plasma endothelin-1 and copeptin levels are not significantly different among populations of controls, syncope patients and seizure patients.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".