Cyclophilins in Ischemic Heart Disease: Differences Between Acute and Chronic Coronary Artery Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cyclophilins (Cyps) are a family of peptidyl-prolyl cis/trans isomerases consistently involved in cardiovascular diseases through the inflammation pathway. This study aims to investigate the serum levels of Cyps (CypA, CypB, CypC and CypD) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and the correlation with clinical characteristics and inflammation parameters. METHODS: We developed an observational prospective study with a total of 125 subjects: 40 patients with acute CAD, 40 patients with chronic CAD and 45 control volunteers, in whom serum levels of Cyps (CypA, CypB, CypC and CypD), interleukins and metalloproteinases were measured. RESULTS: CypA levels increased significantly in CAD patients compared with control subjects, but no differences were noted between acute CAD (7.80 ± 1.30 ng/mL) and chronic CAD (5.52 ± 0.76 ng/mL) patients (P = 0.13). No differences in CypB and CypD levels were showed between CAD patients and controls and between acute CAD and chronic CAD patients. In relation with CypC, the levels in CAD patients were significantly higher compared to controls (32.42 ± 3.71 pg/mL vs. 9.38 ± 1.51 pg/mL, P < 0.001), but no differences between acute and chronic CAD groups were obtained (P = 0.62). We analyzed the CypC > 17.5 pg/mL cut-off point, and it was significantly associated with older age, hypertension, dyslipidemia and more extensive CAD in acute and chronic CAD groups. CONCLUSIONS: CypA and CypC levels are increased in CAD patients. High CypC serum levels could be a novel biomarker in CAD patients correlating with a more severe disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".