MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388866477 · doi:10.1097/mnh.0000000000000957

Eryptosis: a driver of anemia in chronic kidney disease

2023· article· en· W4388866477 on OpenAlexaff
Rosi Bissinger, Syed M. Qadri, Ferruh Artunç

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & Hypertension · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnemiaKidney diseaseMedicineDiseaseHemoglobinBioinformaticsIntensive care medicineImmunologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Anemia, characterized by a reduction in red blood cell (RBC) count or hemoglobin concentration, commonly accompanies chronic kidney disease (CKD), significantly impacting patients' quality of life. This review delves into the multifaceted nature of anemia in CKD, with a focus on novel mechanisms, particularly the dysregulation of eryptosis or programmed cell death of RBCs, leading to shortened RBC lifespan. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies in CKD patients and mouse models revealed that eryptosis, driven by factors such as uremic toxins, inflammation, and imbalances in calcium homeostasis, plays a pivotal role in the development of renal anemia. Dysregulated eryptosis results in premature RBC destruction, exacerbating the hypoproliferative character of anemia in CKD. SUMMARY: Recognizing the intricate relationship between eryptosis and anemia in CKD opens promising prospects for improving patient outcomes and enhancing our understanding of this complex condition. Future research and therapeutic development in this area hold the potential to improve anemia treatment of CKD 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 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Nephrology & HypertensionSame topicErythrocyte Function and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207