MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 13601: Distinct Proteomic Profiles in Human Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm by Segment May Drive Prognostic Differences: Conventional & Machine Learning Analysis

2023· article· en· W4389957087 on OpenAlexaff
Malak Elbatarny, Uroš Kuzmanov, Daniella Eliathamby, Vivian H. Chu, Rashmi Nedadur, Cristine J. Reitz, Omar Hamed, Craig A. Simmons, Jennifer Chung, Bo Wang, Maral Ouzounian, Anthony O. Gramolini

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAneurysmThoracic aortic aneurysmAscending aortaAortic aneurysmDescending aortaThoracic aortaCohortCardiologyAortaRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Acute Type A Aortic Dissection (ATAD) is a surgical emergency with 18% mortality. Anatomic segment (root, ascending, arch, descending) impacts aneurysm natural history but mechanisms remain unclear. Aim: To compare proteomic profiles of human thoracic aortic segments that could account for distinct phenotypes and clinical outcomes; to analyze the largest cohort to date with enhanced depth of coverage. Methods: Aortic tissues were collected (N=148) from 82 unique individuals and analyzed using our customized proteomics protocol ( Figure 1A ). Conventional statistics, machine learning (t-distributed Stochastic Neighbour Embedding, t-SNE), and functional enrichment analyses were used to characterize significant phenotypic differences by segment. Differential protein expression was validated using immunofluorescence. Results: From all samples, 7251 proteins were identified (5660 quantified), exceeding literature (by 100s-1000s). Significant differences were greatest in comparisons of root, ascending, and descending aorta ( Figure 1B-C ). Root vs descending and ascending vs descending comparisons had clear separation in t-SNE analysis; root and ascending samples also clustered modestly ( Figure 1D ). MFAP4, a cellular-binding protein previously associated with descending thoracic dissection in Marfan patients, was significantly elevated in ascending aortic segments compared to root and descending. This was validated by immunofluorescence ( Figure 1E ). Conclusions: We extensively profiled thoracic aneurysm tissue using enhanced coverage, customized proteomics from the largest known cohort of human samples. Thoracic aneurysm phenotype differs by aortic segment as a function of intrinsic biochemical (proteomic) processes. Potential thoracic aneurysm biomarkers likely must account for aortic segment. Multiomic integrative analysis (DNA, RNA, post-translational data) are underway.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicAortic aneurysm repair treatments→French-language works237,207→