MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406789093 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000041405

Associations of cathepsins with pulmonary arterial hypertension mediated by circulating metabolites: A Mendelian randomization study

2025· article· en· W4406789093 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shasha Yang, Qiong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMendelian randomizationCathepsinMetaboliteMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyPhysiologyBiochemistryBiologyEnzymeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The correlation between cathepsins and pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is well-established, but the causative link between them remains uncertain. This study aimed to explore the causal role of circulating metabolites mediating cathepsins in PAH using Mendelian randomization (MR). A 2-sample 2-step MR method was used to identify causal relationship between cathepsins and PAH; causal relationship between circulating metabolites and PAH; and mediated effects of these circulating metabolites. GWAS summary statistics on circulating metabolites were from the Canadian longitudinal study on aging cohort, human plasma cathepsins from The INTERVAL study, and PAH from FinnGen version R10. Two-sample MR analyses involving 9 cathepsins (cathepsin B, E, F, G, H, L2, O, S, and Z). Cathepsin S was associated with high risk of PAH (OR: 1.346, 95% CI: 1.039-1.742, P = .024), and positively with circulating metabolite 1-oleoylglycerol (18:1) levels (OR: 1.062, 95% CI: 1.018-1.108, P = .005). Finally, mediation analysis showed evidence of mediated effect of cathepsin S on PAH through 1-oleoylglycerol (18:1) levels (OR: 0.062, CI: 0.0183-0.106) with a mediated proportion of 20.9% of the total effect. This study reveals cathepsin S increases the risk of PAH mediating by circulating metabolite 1-oleoylglycerol (18:1) levels.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207