MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409702401 · doi:10.1177/10406387251331933

Identification of fibrinogen Aα-chain as an amyloid precursor protein in a case of canine coronary artery amyloidosis

2025· article· en· W4409702401 on OpenAlexaff
Susumu Iwaide, Garrett Louis Wachoski-Dark, Tomoaki Murakami, Niki Sedghi Masoud, Yoshiyuki Itoh, Miki Hisada, Kumiko KIMURA, Tomoyuki SHIBAHARA, Makoto HARITANI, Jeff Caswell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsAmyloidosisFibrinogenAmyloid (mycology)Serum Amyloid A ProteinSerum amyloid APathologyPathogenesisCoronary arteriesMedicineChemistryInternal medicineArteryInflammation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spontaneous amyloid deposition occurs in the coronary arteries in older dogs, but the pathogenesis, including the precursor protein, is not known. We conducted proteome analysis using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to identify the amyloid precursor protein in a 13-y-old male mixed-breed dog with amyloid deposition in intramural coronary arteries, and identified fibrinogen Aα-chain. This form of amyloidosis is characterized by the deposition of amyloid derived from fibrinogen Aα-chains, which has been reported previously only in humans and Japanese squirrels. Within amyloid deposits in the intramural coronary arteries of our canine case, the αC connector region was identified in abundance, whereas in humans and Japanese squirrels, the amyloid arises from the αC domain. Thus, even if amyloid is formed by the same protein, the amyloid-forming peptide and the anatomic site of deposition in our case differed from that in humans and Japanese squirrels.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic InvestigationSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207