MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413965061 · doi:10.1038/s41398-025-03573-3

Detecting suicide risk in bipolar disorder patients from lymphoblastoid cell lines genetic signatures

2025· article· en· W4413965061 on OpenAlexafffund
Omveer Sharma, Ritu Nayak, Liron Mizrahi, Wote Amelo Rike, Ashwani Choudhary, Hagit Sadis, Yara Hussein, Idan Rosh, Utkarsh Tripathi, Aviram Shemen, Yam Stern, Alessio Squassina, Martin Alda, Shani Stern

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersIsrael Science FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityGovernment of CanadaDalhousie Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsBipolar disorderSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychiatryMedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to develop a machine learning algorithm to predict suicide risk in bipolar disorder (BD) patients using RNA sequencing analysis of lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs). By identifying differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between high and low risk patients and their enrichment in relevant pathways, we gained insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying suicide risk. LCL gene expression analysis revealed pathway enrichment related to primary immunodeficiency, ion channels, and cardiovascular defects. Notably, genes such as LCK, KCNN2, and GRIA1 emerged as pivotal, suggesting their potential roles as biomarkers. Machine learning algorithms trained on a subset of the patients and tested on others demonstrated high accuracy in distinguishing low and high risk of suicide in BD patients. Additionally, the study explored the genetic overlap between suicide-related genes and several psychiatric disorders. Our study enhances the understanding of the complex interplay between genetics and suicidal behaviour, providing a foundation for prevention strategies.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207