Use of urine biomarker-derived clusters to predict the risk of chronic kidney disease and all-cause mortality in HIV-infected women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although individual urine biomarkers are associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) incidence and all-cause mortality in the setting of HIV infection, their combined utility for prediction remains unknown. METHODS: We measured eight urine biomarkers shown previously to be associated with incident CKD and mortality risk among 902 HIV-infected women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study: N-acetyl-β-d-glucosaminidase (NAG), kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), alpha-1 microglobulin (α1m), interleukin 18, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, albumin-to-creatinine ratio, liver fatty acid-binding protein and α-1-acid-glycoprotein. A group-based cluster method classified participants into three distinct clusters using the three most distinguishing biomarkers (NAG, KIM-1 and α1m), independent of the study outcomes. We then evaluated associations of each cluster with incident CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) by cystatin C) and all-cause mortality, adjusting for traditional and HIV-related risk factors. RESULTS: Over 8 years of follow-up, 177 CKD events and 128 deaths occurred. The first set of clusters partitioned women into three groups, containing 301 (Cluster 1), 470 (Cluster 2) and 131 (Cluster 3) participants. The rate of CKD incidence was 13, 21 and 50% across the three clusters; mortality rates were 7.3, 13 and 34%. After multivariable adjustment, Cluster 3 remained associated with a nearly 3-fold increased risk of both CKD and mortality, relative to Cluster 1 (both P < 0.001). The addition of the multi-biomarker cluster to the multivariable model improved discrimination for CKD (c-statistic = 0.72-0.76, P = 0.0029), but only modestly for mortality (c = 0.79-0.80, P = 0.099). Clusters derived with all eight markers were no better for discrimination than the three-biomarker clusters. CONCLUSIONS: For predicting incident CKD in HIV-infected women, clusters developed from three urine-based kidney disease biomarkers were as effective as an eight-marker panel in improving risk discrimination.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".