MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256568508 · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000000727

Clinical validation for the aldosterone-to-renin ratio and aldosterone suppression testing using simultaneous fully automated chemiluminescence immunoassays

2015· article· en· W2256568508 on OpenAlexaff
Jenny Manolopoulou, Evelyn Fischer, Anna Dietz, Sven Diederich, Daniel T. Holmes, Riia K. Junnila, Philipp Grimminger, Martín Reincke, Alberto Morganti, Martin Bidlingmaier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary aldosteronismAldosteroneMedicineEssential hypertensionHyperaldosteronismPlasma renin activityCutoffInternal medicineEndocrinologyUrologyConfidence intervalRenin–angiotensin systemBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As larger numbers of hypertensive patients are screened for primary aldosteronism with the aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR), automated analyzers present a practical solution for many laboratories. We report the method-specific ARR cutoff determined with direct, automated chemiluminescence immunoassays allowing the simultaneous measurement of plasma aldosterone concentrations (PACs) and plasma renin concentrations (PRCs). METHODS: Method comparisons to commonly employed assays and tandem mass spectrometry were undertaken. Patients were previously diagnosed based on the local ARR cutoff of 1.2 (ng/dl)/(μIU/ml) in samples collected in upright seated position. Lack of aldosterone suppression in response to salt load to less than 5 ng/dl confirmed primary aldosteronism. For the new assays, the optimal ARR cutoff was established in 152 patients with essential hypertension, 93 with primary aldosteronism and 147 normotensive patients. Aldosterone suppression was assessed in 73 essential hypertensive and 46 primary aldosteronism patients. RESULTS: PAC and PRC were significantly correlated to values determined with currently available methods (P < 0.001). In patients with primary aldosteronism, patients with essential hypertension and controls, mean (95% confidence interval) PAC was 28.4 (25.4-31.8), 6.4 (5.9-6.9) and 6.2 (5.6-6.9) ng/dl, respectively. In the same groups, PRC was 6.6 (5.6-7.7), 12.9 (11.2-14.8) and 26.5 (22.2-31.5) μIU/ml. An ARR cutoff of 1.12 provided 98.9% sensitivity and 78.9% specificity. Employing the new assay aldosterone suppression confirmed the diagnosis of primary aldosteronism and essential hypertension using the cutoff of 5 ng/dl. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that the new assays present a convenient alternative for the measurement of PAC and PRC on a single automated analyzer. Availability of these simultaneous assays should facilitate screening and diagnosis of primary aldosteronism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.193
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207