MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401893297 · doi:10.3390/diagnostics14171847

Inflammatory Protein Panel: Exploring Diagnostic Insights for Peripheral Artery Disease Diagnosis in a Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4401893297 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Li, Rakan Nassereldine, Farah Shaikh, Houssam Younes, Batool Abuhalimeh, Abdelrahman Zamzam, Rawand Abdin, Mohammad Qadura

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtease and Inhibitor Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersBlair Foundation
KeywordsMedicineBiomarkerPeripheralInternal medicineDiseaseCardiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant 1 (CINC-1), a cluster of differentiation 95 (CD95), fractalkine, and T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain 1 (TIM-1) are circulating proteins known to be involved in inflammation. While their roles have been studied in neurological conditions and cardiovascular diseases, their potential as peripheral artery disease (PAD) biomarkers remain unexplored. We conducted a cross-sectional diagnostic study using data from 476 recruited patients (164 without PAD and 312 with PAD). Plasma levels of CINC-1, CD95, fractalkine, and TIM-1 were measured at baseline. A PAD diagnosis was established at recruitment based on clinical exams and investigations, defined as an ankle-brachial index < 0.9 or toe-brachial index < 0.67 with absent/diminished pedal pulses. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained a random forest algorithm, incorporating clinical characteristics and biomarkers that showed differential expression in PAD versus non-PAD patients to predict a PAD diagnosis. Among the proteins tested, CINC-1, CD95, and fractalkine were elevated in PAD vs. non-PAD patients, forming a 3-biomarker panel. Our predictive model achieved an AUROC of 0.85 for a PAD diagnosis using clinical features and this 3-biomarker panel. By combining the clinical characteristics with these biomarkers, we developed an accurate predictive model for a PAD diagnosis. This algorithm can assist in PAD screening, risk stratification, and guiding clinical decisions regarding further vascular assessment, referrals, and medical/surgical management to potentially improve patient outcomes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnosticsSame topicProtease and Inhibitor MechanismsFrench-language works237,207