MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396995239 · doi:10.1681/asn.20213210s1480a

Features and Outcomes of Patients with C1q Nephropathy in the NEPTUNE and CureGN Cohorts: Comparisons to Minimal Change Disease and Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis

2021· article· en· W4396995239 on OpenAlexaff
Scott E. Wenderfer, Maria Larkina, Mir Reza Bekheirnia, Clarissa A. Cassol, Carmen Ávila-Casado, Laura Barisoni, William E. Smoyer, Laura H. Mariani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocal segmental glomerulosclerosisMinimal change diseaseMedicineGlomerulosclerosisSuPARNephropathyDiseaseInternal medicineUrologyGlomerulonephritisProteinuriaEndocrinologyKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Predominant immunostaining for C1q distinguishes a subset of patients with primary glomerular disease. C1q nephropathy (C1qN) has been proposed but not universally accepted as a distinct glomerular disease. This study describes clinical characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients meeting the provisional CureGN definition of C1qN, including comparisons to patients with minimal change disease (MCD) and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) without C1qN. Methods: MCD and FSGS patients with C1qN were identified from the Cure Glomerulonephropathy Network (CureGN) and NEPTUNE cohorts. Comparisons were made to MCD and FSGS patients without C1qN, based on age, disease, and time since kidney biopsy, using 5-to-1 matching. We performed cross-sectional analyses of clinical and treatment data at enrollment and a longitudinal analysis of disease course. Results: A total of 42 patients met the provisional CureGN definition for C1qN (16 adults >18yo, 11 teens 12-18yo, and 15 children <12yo), including 15 with MCD and 27 with FSGS. Those with C1qN were more commonly female (60 vs 49%, p=0.2) and black (34 vs 27%, p=0.4). At enrollment, those with and without C1qN had comparable kidney function (eGFR 90 vs 88 mL/min/1.73m2, p=0.8). Individuals with C1qN were equally likely to have been treated with steroids or other immunosuppressive therapy (76 vs 81%, p=0.4) and to have ever achieved complete remission of proteinuria (defined as uPCR <0.3) (54 vs 65%, p=0.2). Median time to last follow-up was 3.1 yrs (IQR 1.9, 4.4) from enrollment and 4.8 yrs (IQR 3.3, 6.5) from biopsy date. While proportions with kidney failure were higher for FSGS compared to MCD (14 vs 1%, p=0.01), they were similar between patients with and without C1qN (7 vs 10%, p=0.6). There was a trend towards steeper GFR slope in C1qN patients (-4.8 vs -0.2 mL/min/yr, p=0.06). Conclusions: FSGS and MCD patients with and without C1qN have comparable demographics and short-term outcomes in CureGN and NEPTUNE. Outcomes do not appear to be biased by differences in immunosuppressive therapies. Further interrogation of genetic and molecular profiles between patients with and without C1q immunostaining on biopsy may be more informative. Funding: Private Foundation Support

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies→French-language works237,207→