MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805935532 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.170769

Lack of Association among Peptidyl Arginine Deiminase Type 4 Autoantibodies,<i>PADI4</i>Polymorphisms, and Clinical Characteristics in Rheumatoid Arthritis

2018· article· en· W2805935532 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kari Guderud, Marthe T. Mæhlen, Gry Beate Namløs Nordang, Marte K. Viken, Bettina Kulle Andreassen, Øyvind Molberg, Siri T. Flåm, Benedicte A. Lie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAutoantibodyRheumatoid arthritisImmunologyGenotypingCitrullinationSerologyAntibodyArthritisInternal medicineCitrullineGenotypeArginineGeneGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective. We aimed to jointly investigate the role of antipeptidyl arginine deiminase type 4 antibodies (anti-PAD4) and polymorphisms in thePADI4gene together with clinical variables in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Serum IgG autoantibodies to human recombinant PAD4 were identified by DELFIA technique in 745 patients with RA (366 available from previous studies). Genotyping ofPADI4was performed using TaqMan assays in 945 patients and 1118 controls. Clinical data, anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) status, shared epitope status, and a combined genetic risk score were also available. Results. Anti-PAD4 antibodies were detected in 193 (26%) of 745 patients with RA; 149 (77%) of these were also ACPA-positive. No association was observed between anti-PAD4 status and clinical characteristics,PADI4polymorphisms, or genetic risk scores after stratification for ACPA status. Conclusion. Taken together, the results from these combined serological, genetic, and clinical analyses suggest that anti-PAD4 appears to be a bystander autoantibody with no current clinical utility in RA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207