MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920332083 · doi:10.1194/jlr.d090571

Quantitative metabolic profiling of urinary eicosanoids for clinical phenotyping

2019· article· en· W2920332083 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristina Gómez, Carolina González-Riaño, Coral Barbas, Johan Kolmert, Min Hyung Ryu, Christopher Carlsten, Sven‐Erik Dahlén, Craig E. Wheelock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lipid Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEicosanoids and Hypertension Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVetenskapsrådetKarolinska InstitutetHjärt-LungfondenStockholms Läns LandstingAstraZeneca CanadaAllerGenCanada Research ChairsStiftelsen för Strategisk ForskningVårdalstiftelsen
KeywordsIsoprostanesEicosanoidInflammationUrinary systemUrineMedicineAsthmaLipid signalingChemistryPharmacologyOxidative stressInternal medicineBiochemistryArachidonic acidEnzymeLipid peroxidation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The eicosanoids are a family of lipid mediators of pain and inflammation involved in multiple pathologies, including asthma, hypertension, cancer, atherosclerosis, and neurodegenerative diseases. These signaling mediators act locally, but are rapidly metabolized and transported to the systemic circulation as a mixture of primary and secondary metabolites. Accordingly, urine has become a useful readily accessible biofluid for monitoring the endogenous synthesis of these molecules. Herein, we present the validation of a rapid, repeatable, and precise method for the extraction and quantification of 32 eicosanoid urinary metabolites by LC-MS/MS. For 12 out of 17 deconjugated glucuronide eicosanoids, there was no improvement in recovered signal. These metabolites cover the major synthetic pathways, including prostaglandins, leukotrienes, and isoprostanes. The method linearity was >0.99 for all metabolites analyzed, the limit of detection ranged from 0.05–5 ng/ml, and the average extraction recoveries were >90%. All analytes were stable for at least three freeze/thaw cycles. The method was formatted for large-scale analysis of clinical cohorts, and the long-term repeatability was demonstrated over 15 months of acquisition, evidencing high precision (CV <15%, except for tetranorPGEM and 2,3-dinor-11α-PGF 2α , which were <30%). The presented method is suitable for focused mechanistic studies as well as large-scale clinical and epidemiological studies that require repeatable methods capable of producing data that can be concatenated across multiple cohorts.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations34
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lipid ResearchSame topicEicosanoids and Hypertension PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207