A Transcriptomic Biomarker to Quantify Systemic Inflammation in Sepsis — A Prospective Multicenter Phase II Diagnostic Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of a dysregulated immune response discriminates sepsis from uncomplicated infection. Currently used biomarkers fail to describe simultaneously occurring pro- and anti-inflammatory responses potentially amenable to therapy. Marker candidates were screened by microarray and, after transfer to a platform allowing point-of-care testing, validated in a confirmation set of 246 medical and surgical patients. We identified up-regulated pathways reflecting innate effector mechanisms, while down-regulated pathways related to adaptive lymphocyte functions. A panel of markers composed of three up- (Toll-like receptor 5; Protectin; Clusterin) and 4 down-regulated transcripts (Fibrinogen-like 2; Interleukin-7 receptor; Major histocompatibility complex class II, DP alpha1; Carboxypeptidase, vitellogenic-like) described the magnitude of immune alterations. The created gene expression score was significantly greater in patients with definite as well as with possible/probable infection than with no infection (median (Q25/Q75): 80 (60/101)) and 81 (58/97 vs. 49 (27/66), AUC-ROC=0.812 (95%-CI 0.755-0.869), p<0.0001). Down-regulated lymphocyte markers were associated with prognosis with good sensitivity but limited specificity. Quantifying systemic inflammation by assessment of both pro- and anti-inflammatory innate and adaptive immune responses provides a novel option to identify patients-at-risk and may facilitate immune interventions in sepsis.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".