MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381337798 · doi:10.2337/db23-420-p

420-P: Longitudinal Trajectories of Tubular Biomarkers in Type 1 Diabetes

2023· article· en· W4381337798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CHRISTINE LIMONTE, Ionut Bebu, Jesse C. Seegmiller, Mark E. Molitch, BRUCE A. PERKINS, Amy B. Karger, IAN DE BOER

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal functionMedicineBiomarkerInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusUrologyEndocrinologyType 1 diabetesType 2 diabetesUrineUrinary systemExcretionGastroenterologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tubular biomarkers may provide insight into progression of kidney tubulointerstitial pathology that is complementary to traditional measures of glomerular function and damage. Methods: We examined longitudinal tubular biomarker trajectories in the DCCT/EDIC Study of T1D. For each of 220 randomly-selected participants, biomarkers were measured at up to 7 time points over 26 years. Measurements comprised KIM-1 and sTNFR1 in plasma, EGF and MCP1 in timed urine, and a composite tubular secretion score calculated from the urinary clearances of 8 small molecules secreted by the proximal tubule. Biomarker trends were described and associations with intensive diabetes therapy and glycemia changes over time were tested. Results: Mean age was 28 years at baseline, 45% were women, and 50% were assigned to intensive versus conventional therapy during DCCT. At baseline, participants had a mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 125 ml/min/1.73m2, and 90% had a urinary albumin excretion rate (AER) < 30 mg/24h. Mean changes in biomarkers over time (in percent per decade) were: KIM-1 27.3% (95% CI 21.4, 33.5), sTNFR1 16.9% (95% CI 14.5, 19.3), MCP1 18.4% (95% CI 8.9, 28.8), EGF -13.5% (95% CI -16.7, -10.1), EGF/MCP1 -26.9% (95% CI -32.2, -21.3), and tubular secretion score -0.9% (95% CI -1.8, 0.0), compared with -12.0% (95% CI -12.9, -11.1) for eGFR and 10.9% (95% CI 2.5, 20.1) for AER. Intensive versus conventional therapy was associated with slower rise in sTNFR1 (relative difference in change 0.94; 95% CI 0.90, 0.98). Higher time-updated HbA1c was associated with faster rises in sTNFR1 (relative difference in change 1.06 per 1% higher HbA1c; 95% CI 1.05, 1.08) and KIM-1 (1.09; 95% CI 1.05, 1.14). Conclusion: Among people with T1D and normal eGFR at baseline, kidney tubular biomarkers changed significantly over long-term follow-up. Hyperglycemia was associated with larger increases in plasma sTNFR1 and KIM1 over time. Disclosure C.Limonte: None. I.Bebu: None. J.Seegmiller: None. M.Molitch: Consultant; Amryt Pharma Plc, Corcept Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sention, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. B.A.Perkins: Advisory Panel; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, Other Relationship; Abbott, Medtronic, Sanofi, Research Support; Novo Nordisk, Bank of Montreal (BMO). A.B.Karger: Consultant; Roche Diagnostics, Research Support; Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd., Siemens, Speaker's Bureau; Siemens, American Society of Nephrology, American Kidney Fund, National Kidney Foundation. I.De boer: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Bayer Inc., Consultant; George Clinical, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Medscape, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc. Dcct/edic writing group: n/a. Funding National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK094176, U01DK094157)

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207