A proteomic evaluation of urinary changes associated with cardiopulmonary bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The urinary proteome of patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may provide important insights into systemic and renal changes associated with the procedure. Such information may ultimately provide a basis to differentiate changes or properties associated with the development of acute kidney injury. While mass spectrometry (MS) analysis offers the potential for in-depth compositional analysis it is often limited in coverage and relative quantitation capacity. The aim of this study was to develop a process flow for the preparation and comparison of the intraoperative urinary proteome. METHODS: Urines were collected from patients at the start of CPB and 1-h into CPB. Pooled samples (n = 5) from each time point were processed using a modified Filter Assisted Sample Preparation protocol. The resulting peptides were analyzed by 2D-LC-MS/MS and by 1D-LC-MS/MS SWATH (Sequential Window acquisition of All Theoretical fragment ion spectra). RESULTS: The 2D-LC-MS/MS analysis identified 1324 proteins in the two pools, of which 744 were quantifiable. The SWATH approach provided quantitation for 730 proteins, 552 of which overlapped with the common population from the 2D-IDA results. Intensity correlation filtering between the two methods gave 475 proteins for biological interpretation. Proteins displaying greater than threefold changes (>log2 1.59) at 1-hour CPB relative to the initiation of CPB (26 down-regulated and 22 up-regulated) were selected for further analysis. Up-regulated proteins were enriched in GO terms related to humoral immune response, predominantly innate immunity (C4b, lactotransferrin, protein S100-A8, cathelicidin, myeloperoxidase) and extracellular matrix reorganization (e.g. MMP-9). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes a scheme for processing urine from patients undergoing CPB for mass spectrometry-based analysis. The introduction of SWATH into the workflow offers a sample and instrument sparing approach to obtaining consistent in-depth sample analysis. The design of the methodology is such that it can be readily applied to large numbers of clinical samples with the potential for automation. The results also suggest that activation of the innate immune responses occur during cardiac bypass surgery.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".