MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466242879 · doi:10.21767/2472-1158.100017

Epigenetics As The Driving Force In Long-Term Immunosuppression

2016· article· en· W2466242879 on OpenAlexfundno aff
José Luis García Giménez, Nieves Carbonell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epigenetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune cells in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersINCLIVA Instituto de Investigación SanitariaGrand Challenges CanadaGeneralitat ValencianaInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsEpigeneticsSepsisImmunosuppressionSeptic shockImmunologyBiologyImmune systemBioinformaticsMedicineIntensive care medicineGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epigenetics is an emerging frontier of biology, with the potential for deciphering the intricate molecular and transcriptional cellular programs, therefore contributing to explain the pathological evolution of sepsis, one of the most elusive syndromes in medicine. The evolution of sepsis depends not only on the pathogen which originated the infection but also on the genetic and epigenetic background of the host. Short-term mortality of sepsis and septic shock is high, being considered a public health concern worldwide. Immunosuppression is the predominant driving force for morbidity and mortality in late deaths and long-term deaths of survivors from a sepsis episode. In this regard, apoptosis of immune cells and complex epigenetic reprogramming in immune and progenitor cells may contribute to the immunoparalysis observed in post-septic patients, who are prone to the apparition of new, opportunistic infections. Here, we review the literature and expose the most relevant results which explain the epigenetic programs contributing to the progression of sepsis. Furthermore, we revisit the role of circulating histones in the pathogenesis of sepsis and septic shock and finally we discuss about the therapeutic potential of epigenetic drugs in the treatment of 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpigeneticsSame topicImmune cells in cancerFrench-language works237,207