Network-based analysis reveals novel gene signatures in peripheral blood of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is currently the third leading cause of death and there is a huge unmet clinical need to identify disease biomarkers in peripheral blood. Compared to gene level differential expression approaches to identify gene signatures, network analyses provide a biologically intuitive approach which leverages the co-expression patterns in the transcriptome to identify modules of co-expressed genes. A weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) was applied to peripheral blood transcriptome from 238 COPD subjects to discover co-expressed gene modules. We then determined the relationship between these modules and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). In a second, independent cohort of 381 subjects, we determined the preservation of these modules and their relationship with FEV1. For those modules that were significantly related to FEV1, we determined the biological processes as well as the blood cell-specific gene expression that were over-represented using additional external datasets. Using WGCNA, we identified 17 modules of co-expressed genes in the discovery cohort. Three of these modules were significantly correlated with FEV1 (FDR < 0.1). In the replication cohort, these modules were highly preserved and their FEV1 associations were reproducible (P < 0.05). Two of the three modules were negatively related to FEV1 and were enriched in IL8 and IL10 pathways and correlated with neutrophil-specific gene expression. The positively related module, on the other hand, was enriched in DNA transcription and translation and was strongly correlated to CD4+, CD8+ T cell-specific gene expression. Network based approaches are promising tools to identify potential biomarkers for COPD. The ECLIPSE study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline, under ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00292552 and GSK No. SCO104960
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".