MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2904941857 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy564.p767

P767Identification of circulating miRNA-abundances in ruptured versus eroded lesions: A combined optical coherence tomography and miRNA-profiling approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome

2018· article· en· W2904941857 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Philipp Jakob, Tim Kacprowski, Youssef S. Abdelwahed, Matthias Riedel, B E Staehli, N Kraenkel, Harsha V. Renikunta, Denitsa Meteva, Claudio Seppelt, Alexander Lauten, Carsten Skurk, Uwe Voelker, Sabine Ameling, Ulf Landmesser, David M. Leistner

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungInstitute of GeneticsUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreDeutsches Zentrum für Herz-Kreislaufforschung
KeywordsMedicineOptical coherence tomographymicroRNAAcute coronary syndromeProfiling (computer programming)CardiologyInternal medicineRadiologyMyocardial infarctionGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pathophysiologic mechanisms of ACS caused by plaque rupture (ACS with ruptured fibrous cap = RFC-ACS) and plaque erosion (ACS with intact fibrous cap = IFC-ACS) are still poorly understood. Experimental studies indicate that microRNAs orchestrate pathophysiological pathways involved in plaque instability. Therefore, we assessed whether abundances of circulating miRNAs (miRNAs) differ locally at culprit sites of patients presenting with RFC-ACS and IFC-ACS. Methods and results: Patients with ACS were consecutively enrolled. Blood samples were aspirated locally at the area of culprit lesion (local) and systemically from the arterial sheath (systemic). The ACS-causing culprit lesion was assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and classified as RFC-ACS or IFC-ACS. In addition, systemic and local coronary blood was sampled in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Patients with RFC-ACS, IFC-ACS and CAD were matched 1:1:1 according to gender, age, diabetes and hypertension (n=15 per group). Using Platelet-poor plasma, we compared 179 circulating miRNAs after normalization based on lower quartile of Ct-values per sample. We used a linear model adjusting for body mass index (BMI), TIMI-flow and RNA spike-in (Ct UniSp4 – UniSp2)) to assess differentially abundant miRNAs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→