MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807316315 · doi:10.1111/petr.13226

Non‐invasive staging of chronic kidney allograft damage using urine metabolomic profiling

2018· article· en· W2807316315 on OpenAlexafffund
Adina Landsberg, Atul Sharma, Ian W. Gibson, David N. Rush, David S. Wishart, Tom Blydt‐Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalThe Metabolomics Innovation CentreUniversity of AlbertaManitoba HealthUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's Hospital of WinnipegChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaMcMaster University
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBC Children's Hospital
KeywordsMedicineMetaboliteUrineInternal medicineMetabolomicsKidney transplantationProteinuriaConfoundingUrinary systemKidneyKidney diseaseMetabolomeCreatinineUrologyGastroenterologyBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic kidney allograft damage is characterized by IFTA and GS. We sought to identify urinary metabolite signatures associated with severity of IFTA and GS in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. Urine samples (n = 396) from 60 pediatric transplant recipients were obtained at the time of kidney biopsy and assayed for 133 metabolites by mass spectrometry. Metabolite profiles were quantified via PLS-DA. We used mixed-effects regression to identify laboratory and clinical predictors of histopathology. Urine samples (n = 174) without rejection or AKI were divided into training/validation sets (75:25%). Metabolite classifiers trained on IFTA severity and %GS showed strong statistical correlation (r = .73, P < .001 and r = .72; P < .001, respectively) and remained significant on the validation sets. Regression analysis identified additional clinical features that improved prediction: months post-transplant (GS, IFTA); and proteinuria, GFR, and age (GS only). Addition of clinical variables improved performance of the %GS classifier (AUC = 0.9; 95% CI = 0.85-0.96) but not for IFTA (AUC = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.71-0.92). Despite the presence of potentially confounding phenotypes, these findings were further validated in samples withheld for rejection or AKI. We identify urine metabolite classifiers for IFTA and GS, which may prove useful for non-invasive assessment of histopathological damage.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207