Comparative study of two protocols for quantitative image-analysis of serotonin transporter clustering in lymphocytes, a putative biomarker of therapeutic efficacy in major depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pattern of serotonin transporter clustering on the plasma membrane of lymphocytes extracted from human whole blood samples has been identified as a putative biomarker of therapeutic efficacy in major depression. Here we evaluated the possibility of performing a similar analysis using blood smears obtained from rats, and from control human subjects and depression patients. We hypothesized that we could optimize a protocol to make the analysis of serotonin protein clustering in blood smears comparable to the analysis of serotonin protein clustering using isolated lymphocytes. RESULTS: Our data indicate that blood smears require a longer fixation time and longer times of incubation with primary and secondary antibodies. In addition, one needs to optimize the image analysis settings for the analysis of smears. When these steps are followed, the quantitative analysis of both the number and size of serotonin transporter clusters on the plasma membrane of lymphocytes is similar using both blood smears and isolated lymphocytes. CONCLUSIONS: The development of this novel protocol will greatly facilitate the collection of appropriate samples by eliminating the necessity and cost of specialized personnel for drawing blood samples, and by being a less invasive procedure. Therefore, this protocol will help us advance the validation of membrane protein clustering in lymphocytes as a biomarker of therapeutic efficacy in major depression, and bring it closer to its clinical application.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".