Gene Expression Profiles for the Identification of Prevalent Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Diagnosis of atrial fibrillation ( AF ) can be difficult, requiring cumbersome investigations. We aimed to determine the association of established whole‐blood gene expression scores with prevalent AF and to evaluate their performance for the identification of AF in a SIRS (Steroids in Cardiac Surgery) trial cohort. Methods and Results Whole‐blood, transcriptome‐wide gene expression profiling was performed using the Illumina Human HT ‐12 Expression BeadChip in 416 participants (65% men) before surgery, including 91 with a diagnosis of AF . An AF gene score ( GS ) calculated from 7 genes reported to be upregulated in AF and a validated GS for biological age based on 1254 genes related to aging were both independently associated with AF diagnosis before surgery in multivariate logistic regression analyses adjusting for known risk factors ( P =0.0006 and P =0.003). Addition of AF and biological age GSs to clinical risk factors led to significant improvement in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (from 0.77 to 0.80; P =0.03), continuous net reclassification improvement index ( P <0.0001), and integrated discrimination improvement index ( P =0.0002). When stratifying AF by subtype, AF GS was mainly associated with paroxysmal AF ( P =0.003), whereas the biological age GS was mainly associated with permanent AF ( P =0.017). Conclusions We validated the existence of a blood gene expression signature for prevalent AF and showed that biological age derived from gene expression is significantly associated with prevalent AF . These findings suggest a potential utility of blood gene expression for the identification of patients with AF , particularly paroxysmal AF . This result could have implications for the prevention and management of cryptogenic stroke. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00427388.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".