MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of predictive biomarkers of response to treatment in patients with antibody mediated rejection: a case –control proteomics study

2024· preprint· en· W4391341422 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Nafar, Shiva Samavat, Shiva Kalantari, Leonard J. Foster, Kyung‐Mee Moon, Nooshin Dalili, somaye Heidari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarkerProteomicsMedicineUrineAntibodyInternal medicineQuantitative proteomicsBiomarker discoveryOncologyImmunologyBioinformaticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Timely detection and appropriate treatment of Acute antibody mediated rejection (AMR) would affect long-term survival of allograft. This study was designed to discover non-invasive biomarkers in prediction of response to therapy in AMR patients. Material and methods: in this case- control study, urine samples of 21 biopsy proven AMR patients were were subjected to proteomics with label free quantification. Patients were allocated into two groups of responders and non- responders to treatment. Urine proteins were identified and their expressions were compared in two groups in order to discover potential candidate biomarkers. Results: From 1020 identified proteins, 257 proteins were differentially expressed between groups among them 153 and 104 proteins increased and decreased in non- responder patients respectively. Complement pathway was more active in non-responders than responders and, extracellular matrix proteins were mainly reduced in non-responders. IGFBP-6 were determined as the most sensitive and specific biomarker in prediction of non-responder patients. Conclusion: According to the role of IGFBP-6 in apoptosis induction and tubular damage, up-regulation of this protein could be a good predictor of response to treatment in AMR patients and treatment approach could be determined based on IGFBP_6 changes. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207