Raftlin – a potential biomarker for axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: An observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our aim is to evaluate serum Raftlin levels as a biomarker for diagnosing and monitoring disease activity in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and Psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This trial included 40 axSpA patients, 40 PsA patients, and 40 healthy participants as the control group. Disease activity was assessed with Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score for axSpA patients and The Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis for PsA patients. The Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada index, health assessment questionnaire-disability index, and numeric rating scale were used to evaluate the enthesitis severity, disability, and pain status of all patients. Serum Raftlin levels were determined using the ELISA method. The 3 groups had no statistical differences regarding gender, age, weight, height, BMI, educational status, and exercise habits. The axSpA group had higher Raftlin levels than the PsA and control groups, and Raftlin levels were statistically significant in predicting the likelihood of axSpA. We found no statistically significant differences between the PsA and control groups. We found no statistically significant difference in Raftlin levels in HLA-B27 positive versus HLA-B27 negative patients in both axSpA and PsA groups. Our results also did not detect any correlation of Raftlin levels with Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, health assessment questionnaire-disability index, numeric rating scale, and Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada index in axSpA patients. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined that Raftlin level ≥ 6.31 ng/mL discriminates axSpA from normal individuals with 92.5% sensitivity, 59% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.738. Our results demonstrate that although serum Raftlin levels are elevated in axSpA patients, Raftlin cannot be used as an alone diagnostic marker for axSpA. Furthermore, it was not found to be related to the monitoring of disease activity, the level of pain, disability, or severity of enthesitis. This study is prospectively registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT05771389).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".