MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2973573232 · doi:10.1101/19000281

LncRNA and predictive model to improve the diagnosis of clinically diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis

2019· preprint· en· W2973573232 on OpenAlexaff
Xuejiao Hu, Hao Chen, S. Matthew Liao, Hao Bai, Shubham Gupta, Yi Zhou, Juan Zhou, Lin Jiao, Lijuan Wu, Minjin Wang, Xuerong Chen, Yanhong Zhou, Xiaojun Lu, Ye Hu, Zhaolei Zhang, Binwu Ying

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNomogramTuberculosisCohortLogistic regressionInternal medicineOncologyMycobacterium tuberculosisDiseaseLactate dehydrogenasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Clinically diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) patients lack Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) microbiologic evidence, and misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis often occurs as a consequence. We investigated the potential of lncRNAs and corresponding predictive models to diagnose these patients. Methods We enrolled 1372 subjects, including clinically diagnosed PTB patients, non-TB disease controls and healthy controls, in three cohorts (Screening, Selection and Validation). Candidate lncRNAs differentially expressed in blood samples of the PTB and healthy control groups were identified by microarray and qRT-PCR in the Screening Cohort. Logistic regression models were developed using lncRNAs and/or electronic health records (EHRs) from clinically diagnosed PTB patients and non-TB disease controls in the Selection Cohort. These models were evaluated by AUC and decision curve analysis, and the optimal model was presented as a Web-based nomogram, which was evaluated in the Validation Cohort. The biological function of lncRNAs was interrogated using ELISA, lactate dehydrogenase release analysis and flow cytometry. Results Three differentially expressed lncRNAs ( ENST00000497872, n333737, n335265 ) were identified. The optimal model (i.e., nomogram) incorporated these three lncRNAs and six EHR variables (age, hemoglobin, weight loss, low-grade fever, CT calcification and TB-IGRA). The nomogram showed an AUC of 0.89, sensitivity of 0.86 and specificity of 0.82 in the Validation Cohort, which demonstrated better discrimination and clinical net benefit than the EHR model. ENST00000497872 may regulate inflammatory cytokine production, cell death and apoptosis during MTB infection. Conclusion LncRNAs and the user-friendly nomogram could facilitate the early identification of PTB cases among suspected patients with negative MTB microbiologic evidence. Key Messages What is the key question? Does integrating immune-related lncRNA signatures and electronic health records (EHRs) promote the early identification of PTB patients who are symptomatic but lack microbiologic evidence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)? What is the bottom line? We found three long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), i.e., ENST00000497872 , n 333737 and n335265 , were potential diagnostic biomarkers for clinically diagnosed PTB patients; and we further developed and validated a novel nomogram incorporating these three lncRNAs and six electronic health records (EHRs), which were readily obtainable even in a resource-constrained setting and achieved a c-statistic of 0.89, sensitivity of 0.86 and specificity of 0.82 in a separate validation cohort. Why read on? This study focuses on the challenge of accurately diagnosing PTB patients with negative MTB microbiological evidence and serves as the first proof-of-concept that integrating lncRNA signatures and EHR data could be a more promising diagnostic approach for clinically diagnosed PTB patients. SUMMARY This study developed and validated a novel nomogram that incorporated three lncRNAs and six EHR fields could be a useful predictive tool in identifying PTB patients who lack MTB microbiologic evidence.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research→French-language works237,207→