MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361003779 · doi:10.3390/diagnostics13071257

Anti-U11/U12 Antibodies as a Rare but Important Biomarker in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis: A Narrative Review

2023· review· en· W4361003779 on OpenAlexaff
Marvin J. Fritzler, Chelsea Bentow, Lorenzo Beretta, Boaz Palterer, Janire Perurena-Prieto, Maria Teresa Sanz-Martínez, Alfredo Castillo, Ana Marín, Vicent Fonollosa‐Pla, Eduardo L. Callejas-Moraga, Carmen Pilar Simeón‐Aznar, Michael Mähler

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoantibodyMedicineAntibodyImmunologyBiomarkerConnective tissue diseasePathologyAutoimmune diseaseBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anti-nuclear (ANA) are present in approximately 90% of systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients and are key biomarkers in supporting the diagnosis and determining the prognosis of this disease. In addition to the classification criteria autoantibodies for SSc [i.e., anti-centromere, anti-topoisomerase I (Scl-70), anti-RNA polymerase III], other autoantibodies have been associated with important SSc phenotypes. Among them, anti-U11/U12 ribonucleoprotein (RNP) antibodies, also known as anti-RNPC-3, were first reported in a patient with SSc, but very little is known about their association and clinical utility. The U11/U12 RNP macromolecular complex consists of several proteins involved in alternative mRNA splicing. More recent studies demonstrated associations of anti-anti-U11/U12 antibodies with SSc and severe pulmonary fibrosis as well as with moderate to severe gastrointestinal dysmotility. Lastly, anti-U11/U12 autoantibodies have been strongly associated with malignancy in SSc patients. Here, we aimed to summarize the knowledge of anti-U11/U12/RNPC-3 antibodies in SSc, including their seroclinical associations in a narrative literature review.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnosticsSame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207