Genetic Programs Between Steroid-Sensitive and Steroid-Insensitive Interstitial Lung Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effectiveness of corticosteroids (GCs) varies greatly in interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). In this study, we aimed to compare the gene expression profiles of patients with cryptogenic organizing pneumonia (COP), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), and non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) and identify the molecules and pathways responsible for GCs sensitivity in ILDs. Three datasets (GSE21411, GSE47460, and GSE32537) were selected. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) among COP, IPF, NSIP, and healthy control (CTRL) groups were identified. Functional enrichment analysis and protein-protein interaction network analysis were performed to examine the potential functions of DEGs. There were 128 DEGs when COP versus CTRL, 257 DEGs when IPF versus CTRL, 205 DEGs when NSIP versus CTRL, and 270 DEGs when COP versus IPF. The DEGs in different ILDs groups were mainly enriched in the inflammatory response. Further pathway analysis showed that "interleukin (IL)-17 signaling pathway" (hsa04657) and "tumor necrosis factor (TNF) signaling pathway" were associated with different types of ILDs. A total of 10 genes associated with inflammatory response were identified as hub genes and their expression levels in the IPF group were higher than those in the COP group. Finally, we identified two GCs' response-related differently expressed genes (FOSL1 and DDIT4). Our bioinformatics analysis demonstrated that the inflammatory response played a pathogenic role in the progression of ILDs. We also illustrated that the inflammatory reaction was more severe in the IPF group compared to the COP group and identified two GCs' response-related differently expressed genes (FOSL1 and DDIT4) in ILDs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".