Proteomic prediction of clinical response for a large multicenter clinical trial of Ulcerative AQ2 Colitis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a sub-study of the Ascend III clinical trial of mesalamine, patients participating in this large, international, multicenter, randomized, doubleblind, double dummy, active -controlled clinical trial were studied using serum proteomics before and during treatment (6 weeks). The Ascend III study was comprised of 772 patients with UC, and these patients were also given the opportunity to participate in a proteomic sub-study. Of these, consent for proteomic and genetic analysis was given by 659 subjects. We analyzed data for 284 females and 375 males, for at total of 1243 serum samples. Each serum sample was screened and quantified by a panel of 212 antibodies with the Multi-Analyte Profiling assay developed by Rules-Based Medicine, Inc. Paired samples (before and after 6 weeks of mesalamine treatment) were tested for each patient. Data was analysed using ANOVA and T-test comparisons. No Caption available. We identified a number of proteins that showed significant differences: Proteomic analysis of patients with UC can predict clinical response to mesalamine 2.4 or 4.8 grams per day or neither. Moreover, this work showed a gender difference in the proteomic patterns in responders and nonresponders that is independent to the dose of mesalamine used, suggesting different biologic processes in males and females with UC.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it