MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Connection between MiR-122 and Lymphocytes in Patients Receiving Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection

2023· article· en· W4388499748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marina Manea, Dimitri Apostol, Ileana Constantinescu

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroorganisms · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic hepatitisHepatitis B virusInternal medicineCohortImmunologymicroRNAVirusBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New molecular predictors for the response to treatment in HBV (hepatitis B virus) infection are assessed. Among them is miR-122. Our article searches the connection between miR-122 and the counts of lymphocytes in chronic HBV patients receiving treatment. We included the sera of 38 Romanian subjects with chronic HBV infection (20 receiving treatment and 18 not receiving treatment) and 5 healthy controls. The expression of miR-122 was determined using RT-PCR (real-time PCR) and a 2−ΔΔCT method. Two systematic analyses were also performed on databases (PUBMED, Web of Science, and Science Direct), eliminating systematic reviews, editorials, letters to editors, meta-analyses, reviews, conference proceedings, or pre-print manuscripts. We included human-based articles following the PRISMA criteria and the Newcastle Ottawa Assessment Scale for Case–Control and Cohort studies. R 4.2.2 was used for statistics, and MIENTURNET and STRING were used for the bioinformatic analysis. Our results showed a link between the variations in the expression of miR-122 and the counts of lymphocytes in HBV Romanian patients receiving therapy. Treatment influenced miR-122 and the lymphocyte numbers. This is the first study with these results, and it may lead to a new perspective on the inter-relationships between microRNAs and therapy in HBV patients.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroorganismsSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207