MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087272604 · doi:10.1172/jci139700

The ABO histo-blood group, endothelial activation, and acute respiratory distress syndrome risk in critical illness

2020· article· en· W3087272604 on OpenAlexaff
John P. Reilly, Nuala J. Meyer, M.G.S. Shashaty, Brian J. Anderson, C.A.G. Ittner, Thomas Dunn, Brian Lim, Caitlin M. Forker, Michael Bonk, Ethan Kotloff, Rui Feng, Edward Cantu, Nilam S. Mangalmurti, Carolyn S. Calfee, Michael A. Matthay, Carmen Mikacenic, Keith R. Walley, James E. Russell, David C. Christiani, Mark M. Wurfel, Paul N. Lanken, Muredach P. Reilly, Jason D. Christie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Investigation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteGenentechNational Institutes of HealthPerelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaChina Scholarship CouncilMarcus FoundationUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsMedicineARDSABO blood group systemDisseminated intravascular coagulationHypoxemiaPulmonary edemaImmunologyEndothelial dysfunctionInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

and microthrombosis (1, 2).Clinically, it is recognized as diffuse noncardiogenic pulmonary edema and severe hypoxemia leading to acute respiratory failure in the setting of a precipitating illness (3).It is estimated that ARDS affects at least 190,000 people in the United States annually, and mortality ranges from 30% to 50% (4).Currently, ARDS therapies are largely supportive, including lung-protective mechanical ventilation, fluid restrictive management, and prone positioning (5-7).Despite many clinical trials, however, no pharmacological therapy aimed at its pathogenesis has been consistently shown to either prevent ARDS or reduce mortality (8-11).One potential explanation for this failure of translation from promising preclinical therapeutics to human disease is pathogenic heterogeneity of ARDS, in which genetic factors may play a role (12-16). BACKGROUND.The ABO histo-blood group is defined by carbohydrate modifications and is associated with risk for multiple diseases, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).We hypothesized that genetically determined blood subtype A1 is associated with increased risk of ARDS and markers of microvascular dysfunction and coagulation. METHODS.We conducted analyses in 3 cohorts of critically ill trauma and sepsis patients (n = 3710) genotyped on genomewide platforms to determine the association of the A1 blood type genotype with ARDS risk.We subsequently determined whether associations were present in FUT2-defined nonsecretors who lack ABO antigens on epithelium, but not endothelium.In a patient subgroup, we determined the associations of blood type with plasma levels of endothelial glycoproteins and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC).Lastly, we tested whether blood type A was associated with less donor lung injury recovery during human ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP). RESULTS.The A1 genotype was associated with a higher risk of moderate to severe ARDS relative to type O in all 3 populations.In sepsis, this relationship was strongest in nonpulmonary infections.The association persisted in nonsecretors, suggesting a vascular mechanism.The A1 genotype was also associated with higher DIC risk as well as concentrations of thrombomodulin and von Willebrand factor, which in turn were associated with ARDS risk.Blood type A was also associated with less lung injury recovery during EVLP. CONCLUSION.We identified a replicable association between ABO blood type A1 and risk of ARDS among the critically ill, possibly mediated through microvascular dysfunction and coagulation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207