Comparison of Complement Pathway Activation in Autoimmune Glomerulonephritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Studies on complement activation have implicated a combination of the classical pathway (CP), lectin pathway (LP), and alternative pathway (AP) in triggering the terminal pathway (TP) for each common autoimmune glomerulonephritis (GN). Evaluating different pathways simultaneously may help identify whether one is preferentially activated and, consequently, which is best to target for each disease. Methods: We followed 112 patients with focal segmental glomerular sclerosis (FSGS), membranous nephropathy (MN), IgA nephropathy (IgAN), lupus nephritis (LN), and antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) for a median duration of 22 (12-52) months. At the time of greatest clinical activity, we simultaneously evaluated urinary C3a (C3 convertase activity), C5a and sC5b-9 (TP), MASP-1 and MASP-2 (LP), C1q (CP), C4a (CP/LP), and Ba and Bb (AP). We evaluated the relation between activation fragments of the AP and CP/LP with the TP. Results: Urinary complement biomarkers for each pathway were associated with the severity of proteinuria. Fragments of the TP were higher among patients with FSGS and MN compared with patients with IgAN, LN, and AAV. For the AP, urinary Ba level was lower in those with IgAN and LN compared with those with FSGS. For the CP/LP, urinary C4a, MASP-1, and MASP-2 levels were similar between diseases whereas urinary C1q levels were lower in those with LN. For each GN, independent associations existed between the activation markers of the AP and CP/LP with the degree of TP activation, except for the AP in AAV, although perhaps underpowered. Conclusion: The AP and CP/LP contribute individually to the TP activation in autoimmune GN, and both seem to be valid potential therapeutic targets.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".