Generation of Antigen Microarrays to Screen for Autoantibodies in Heart Failure and Heart Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autoantibodies directed against endogenous proteins including contractile proteins and endothelial antigens are frequently detected in patients with heart failure and after heart transplantation. There is evidence that these autoantibodies contribute to cardiac dysfunction and correlate with clinical outcomes. Currently, autoantibodies are detected in patient sera using individual ELISA assays (one for each antigen). Thus, screening for many individual autoantibodies is laborious and consumes a large amount of patient sample. To better capture the broad-scale antibody reactivities that occur in heart failure and post-transplant, we developed a custom antigen microarray technique that can simultaneously measure IgM and IgG reactivities against 64 unique antigens using just five microliters of patient serum. We first demonstrated that our antigen microarray technique displayed enhanced sensitivity to detect autoantibodies compared to the traditional ELISA method. We then piloted this technique using two sets of samples that were obtained at our institution. In the first retrospective study, we profiled pre-transplant sera from 24 heart failure patients who subsequently received heart transplants. We identified 8 antibody reactivities that were higher in patients who developed cellular rejection (2 or more episodes of grade 2R rejection in first year after transplant as defined by revised criteria from the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation) compared with those who did have not have rejection episodes. In a second retrospective study with 31 patients, we identified 7 IgM reactivities that were higher in heart transplant recipients who developed antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) compared with control recipients, and in time course studies, these reactivities appeared prior to overt graft dysfunction. In conclusion, we demonstrated that the autoantibody microarray technique outperforms traditional ELISAs as it uses less patient sample, has increased sensitivity, and can detect autoantibodies in a multiplex fashion. Furthermore, our results suggest that this autoantibody array technology may help to identify patients at risk of rejection following heart transplantation and identify heart transplant recipients with AMR.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".