A novel multiplex biomarker panel for profiling human acute and chronic kidney disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute and chronic kidney disease continues to confer significant morbidity and mortality in the clinical setting. Despite high prevalence of these conditions, few validated biomarkers exist to predict kidney dysfunction. In this study, we utilized a novel kidney multiplex panel to measure 21 proteins in plasma and urine to characterize the spectrum of biomarker profiles in kidney disease. Blood and urine samples were obtained from age-/sex-matched healthy control subjects (HC), critically-ill COVID-19 patients with acute kidney injury (AKI), and patients with chronic or end-stage kidney disease (CKD/ESKD). Biomarkers were measured with a kidney multiplex panel, and results analyzed with conventional statistics and machine learning. Correlations were examined between biomarkers and patient clinical and laboratory variables. Median AKI subject age was 65.5 (IQR 58.5-73.0) and median CKD/ESKD age was 65.0 (IQR 50.0-71.5). Of the CKD/ESKD patients, 76.1% were on hemodialysis, 14.3% of patients had kidney transplant, and 9.5% had CKD without kidney replacement therapy. In plasma, 19 proteins were significantly different in titer between the HC versus AKI versus CKD/ESKD groups, while NAG and RBP4 were unchanged. TIMP-1 (PPV 1.0, NPV 1.0), best distinguished AKI from HC, and TFF3 (PPV 0.99, NPV 0.89) best distinguished CKD/ESKD from HC. In urine, 18 proteins were significantly different between groups except Calbindin, Osteopontin and TIMP-1. Osteoactivin (PPV 0.95, NPV 0.95) best distinguished AKI from HC, and β2-microglobulin (PPV 0.96, NPV 0.78) best distinguished CKD/ESKD from HC. A variety of correlations were noted between patient variables and either plasma or urine biomarkers. Using a novel kidney multiplex biomarker panel, together with conventional statistics and machine learning, we identified unique biomarker profiles in the plasma and urine of patients with AKI and CKD/ESKD. We demonstrated correlations between biomarker profiles and patient clinical variables. Our exploratory study provides biomarker data for future hypothesis driven research on kidney disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".