MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008470844 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.190602

Serum MicroRNA Signature as a Diagnostic and Therapeutic Marker in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis

2020· article· en· W3008470844 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S Wade, Trudy McGarry, Siobhan Wade, Ursula Fearon, Douglas J. Veale

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsoriatic arthritismicroRNAMedicineInternal medicineSignature (topology)ArthritisBiologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: MicroRNA (miRNA) are small endogenous regulatory RNA molecules that have emerged as potential therapeutic targets and biomarkers in autoimmunity. Here, we investigated serum miRNA levels in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and further assessed a serum miRNA signature in therapeutic responder versus nonresponder PsA patients. METHODS: Serum samples were collected from healthy controls (HC; n = 20) and PsA patients (n = 31), and clinical demographics were obtained. To examine circulatory miRNA in serum from HC and PsA patients, a focused immunology miRNA panel was analyzed utilizing a miRNA Fireplex assay (FirePlex Bioworks Inc.). MiRNA expression was further assessed in responders versus nonresponders according to the European League Against Rheumatism response criteria. RESULTS: < 0.05), with high specificity and sensitivity determined by receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. Analysis of responder versus nonresponders demonstrated higher baseline levels of miR-221-3p, miR-130a-3p, miR-146a-5p, miR-151-5p, and miR-26a-5p were associated with therapeutic response. CONCLUSION: This study identified a 6-serum microRNA signature that could be attractive candidates as noninvasive markers for PsA and may help to elucidate the disease pathogenesis.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations46
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207