Increased Serum Levels of Anti-Carbamylated 78-kDa Glucose-Regulated Protein Antibody in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the presence and titer of anti-carbamylated 78-kDa glucose-regulated protein (anti-CarGRP78) antibody in serum from controls, and patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and primary Sjögren syndrome (pSS). Thirty-three RA patients, 20 SLE patients, 20 pSS patients, and 20 controls were enrolled from our outpatient clinic. GRP78 was cloned and carbamylated. Serum titers of anti- cyclic citrullinated peptides (anti-CCP), anti-GRP78, and anti-CarGRP78 were measured with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. No differences in serum titers of anti-GRP78 antibody in patients with RA, SLE, or pSS compared with the controls were observed. Serum levels of anti-carGRP78 antibody in patients with RA, but not SLE or pSS, were significantly higher compared with the controls (OD405 0.15 ± 0.08 versus 0.11 ± 0.03, p = 0.033). There was a positive correlation between the serum levels of anti-GRP78 antibody, but not anti-CarGRP78 antibody, with the levels of anti-CCP antibody in patients with RA. Both anti-GRP78 and anti-carGRP78 antibodies failed to correlate with C-reactive protein levels in patients with RA. In conclusion, we demonstrated the presence of anti-CarGRP78 antibody in patients with RA. In addition, the serum titer of anti-CarGRP78 antibody was significantly elevated in patients with RA compared with the controls. Anti-CarGRP78 antibody could also be detected in patients with SLE or pSS.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".