MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384203518 · doi:10.3390/ijms241411342

Prognostic Significance of Activated Monocytes in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

2023· article· en· W4384203518 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Abo‐Aly, Elica Shokri, Lakshman Chelvarajan, Wadea Tarhuni, Himi Tripathi, Ahmed Abdel‐Latif

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyMedicineElevation (ballistics)MonocyteMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circulating monocytes have different subsets, including classical (CD14++CD16−), intermediate (CD14++CD16+), and nonclassical (CD14+CD16++), which play different roles in cardiovascular physiology and disease progression. The predictive value of each subset for adverse clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease is not fully understood. We sought to evaluate the prognostic efficacy of each monocyte subset in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We recruited 100 patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Blood samples were collected at the time of presentation to the hospital (within 6 h from onset of symptoms, baseline (BL)) and then at 3, 6, 12, and 24 h after presentation. Monocytes were defined as CD45+/HLA-DR+ and then subdivided based on the expression of CD14, CD16, CCR2, CD11b, and CD42. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure, stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, and recurrent myocardial infarction. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, including baseline comorbidities, were performed. The mean age of our cohort was 58.9 years and 25% of our patients were females. Patients with high levels (above the median) of CD14+CD16++ monocytes showed an increased risk for the primary endpoint in comparison to patients with low levels; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for CD14+/CD16++ cells was 4.3 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.2–14.8, p = 0.02), for CD14+/CD16++/CCR2+ cells was 3.82 (95% CI 1.06–13.7, p = 0.04), for CD14+/CD16++/CD42b+ cells was 3.37 (95% CI 1.07–10.6, p = 0.03), for CD14+/CD16++/CD11b+ was 5.17 (95% CI 1.4–18.0, p = 0.009), and for CD14+ HLA-DR+ was 7.5 (95% CI 2.0–28.5, p = 0.002). CD14++CD16−, CD14++CD16+, and their CD11b+, CCR2+, and CD42b+ aggregates were not significantly predictive for our composite endpoint. Our study shows that CD14+ CD16++ monocytes and their subsets expressing CCR2, CD42, and CD11b could be important predictors of clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI. Further studies with a larger sample size and different coronary artery disease phenotypes are needed to verify the findings.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207