RNA-Seq Analysis of Gene Expression, Viral Pathogen, and B-Cell/T-Cell Receptor Signatures in Complex Chronic Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) remains poorly understood. Although infections are speculated to trigger the syndrome, a specific infectious agent and underlying pathophysiological mechanism remain elusive. In a previous study, we described similar clinical phenotypes in CFS patients and alternatively diagnosed chronic Lyme syndrome (ADCLS) patients—individuals diagnosed with Lyme disease by testing from private Lyme specialty laboratories but who test negative by reference 2-tiered serologic analysis. Methods: Here, we performed blinded RNA-seq analysis of whole blood collected from 25 adults diagnosed with CFS and 13 ADCLS patients, comparing these cases to 25 matched controls and 11 patients with well-controlled systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Samples were collected at patient enrollment and not during acute symptom flares. RNA-seq data were used to study host gene expression, B-cell/T-cell receptor profiles (BCR/TCR), and potential viral infections. Results: No differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were found to be significant when CFS or ADCLS cases were compared to controls. Forty-two DEGs were found when SLE cases were compared to controls, consistent with activation of interferon signaling pathways associated with SLE disease. BCR/TCR repertoire analysis did not show significant differences between CFS and controls or ADCLS and controls. Finally, viral sequences corresponding to anelloviruses, human pegivirus 1, herpesviruses, and papillomaviruses were detected in RNA-seq data, but proportions were similar (P = .73) across all genus-level taxonomic categories. Conclusions: Our observations do not support a theory of transcriptionally mediated immune cell dysregulation in CFS and ADCLS, at least outside of periods of acute symptom flares.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".