Global patterns of amyloid typing: results of a survey by the International Society of Amyloidosis (ISA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Accurate tissue typing in amyloidosis is essential to provide appropriate therapy for individual patients.Objective To get a real-life overview of typing strategies worldwide.Methods The International Society of Amyloidosis (ISA) performed an online questionnaire survey among ISA members. We prepared questionnaire sheets for referral institutions (Category 1; C1), institutions performing amyloid typing for internal requests only (C2), and institutions outsourcing amyloid typing to referral institutions (C3), respectively.Results Seventy-six institutions participated in this survey, including C1 (n = 33), C2 (n = 20) and C3 (n = 23) institutions. Multiple typing methods were available across the responding institutions, including immunohistochemistry (85% of C1/C2 institutions), immunofluorescence microscopy (43%), genetic analysis (77%) and mass spectrometric analysis (42%). Commercial antibodies were used worldwide for immunohistochemistry. C1 institutions in Europe and Asia also used various in-house antibodies. Ninety-three percent of institutions performed genetic analysis of TTR gene, followed by APOA1 (43%), FGA, GSN, LYZ (33%) and APOA2 (31%). Hierarchical referral flows of mass spectrometric analysis, immunohistochemistry and genetic analysis were observed regionally and internationally. Globalization and centralization of referral flows were more prominent for mass spectrometric analysis.Conclusion These data provide an assessment of the current state, enabling improvement in capabilities of amyloid typing worldwide and enhancing regional/international networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".