MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403138072 · doi:10.3390/jcm13195919

Process-Specific Blood Biomarkers and Outcomes in COVID-19 Versus Non-COVID-19 ARDS (APEL–COVID Study): A Prospective, Observational Cohort Study

2024· article· en· W4403138072 on OpenAlexafffund
Olivier Lesur, Eric David Segal, Kevin Rego, Alain Mercat, Pierre Asfar, Frédéric Chagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicApelin-related biomedical research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMedicineARDSInternal medicineProspective cohort studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BiomarkerCohortCohort studyLogistic regressionSeverity of illnessLungDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are often considered separate clinico-radiological entities. Whether these conditions also present a single process-specific systemic biomolecular phenotype and how this relates to patient outcomes remains unknown. A prospective cohort study was conducted, including adult patients admitted to the ICU and general floors for COVID-19-related (COVID+) or non-COVID-19-related (COVID−) acute respiratory failure during the main phase of the pandemic. The primary objective was to study blood biomarkers and outcomes among different groups and severity subsets. Results: A total of 132 patients were included, as follows: 67 COVID+, 54 COVID− (with 11 matched control subjects for biomarker reference), and 58 of these patients allowed for further pre- and post-analysis. The baseline apelin (APL) levels were higher in COVID+ patients (p < 0.0001 vs. COVID− patients) and in SARS COVID+ patients (p ≤ 0.02 vs. ARDS), while the IL-6 levels were higher in ARDS COVID− patients (p ≤ 0.0001 vs. SARS). Multivariable logistic regression analyses with cohort biomarkers and outcome parameters revealed the following: (i) log-transformed neprilysin (NEP) activity was significantly higher in COVID+ patients (1.11 [95% CI: 0.4–1.9] vs. 0.37 [95% CI: 0.1–0.8], fold change (FC): 1.43 [95% CI: 1.04–1.97], p = 0.029) and in SARS patients (FC: 1.65 [95% CI: 1.05–2.6], p = 0.032 vs. non-SARS COVID+ patients, and 1.73 [95% CI: 1.19–2.5], p = 0.005 vs. ARDS COVID− patients) and (ii) higher lysyl oxidase (LOX) activity and APL levels were respectively associated with death and a shorter length of hospital stay in SARS COVID+ patients (Odds Ratios (OR): 1.01 [1.00–1.02], p = 0.05, and OR: −0.007 [−0.013–0.0001], p = 0.048). Conclusion: Process-specific blood biomarkers exhibited distinct profiles between COVID+ and COVID− patients, and across stages of severity. NEP and LOX activities, as well as APL levels, are particularly linked to COVID+ patients and their outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04632732).

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicApelin-related biomedical researchFrench-language works237,207