MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415809654 · doi:10.3390/ph18111659

Machine Learning-Integrated Explainable Artificial Intelligence Approach for Predicting Steroid Resistance in Pediatric Nephrotic Syndrome: A Metabolomic Biomarker Discovery Study

2025· article· en· W4415809654 on OpenAlexaff
Fatma Hilal Yağın, Feyza İnceoğlu, Cemil Çolak, Amal K. Alkhalifa, Sarah A. Alzakari, Mohammadreza Aghaei

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersPrincess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University
KeywordsBiomarker discoveryBiomarkerNephrotic syndromeMetabolomicsRandom forestReceiver operating characteristic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: Nephrotic syndrome (NS) represents a complex glomerular disorder with significant clinical heterogeneity across pediatric and adult populations. Although glucocorticosteroids have constituted the mainstay of therapeutic intervention for more than six decades, primary treatment resistance manifests in approximately 20% of pediatric patients and 50% of adult cohorts. Steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) is associated with substantially greater morbidity compared to steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (SSNS), characterized by both iatrogenic glucocorticoid toxicity and progressive nephron loss with attendant decline in renal function. Based on this, the current study aims to develop a robust machine learning (ML) model integrated with explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to distinguish SRNS and identify important biomarker candidate metabolites. Methods: In the study, biomarker candidate compounds obtained from proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1 H NMR) metabolomics analyses on plasma samples taken from 41 patients with NS (27 SSNS and 14 SRNS) were used. We developed ML models to predict steroid resistance in pediatric NS using metabolomic data. After preprocessing with MICE-LightGBM imputation for missing values (<30%) and standardization, the dataset was randomly split into training (80%) and testing (20%) sets, repeated 100 times for robust evaluation. Four supervised algorithms (XGBoost, LightGBM, AdaBoost, and Random Forest) were trained and evaluated using AUC, sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, accuracy, and Brier score. XAI methods including SHAP (for global feature importance and model interpretability) and LIME (for individual patient-level explanations) were applied to identify key metabolomic biomarkers and ensure clinical transparency of predictions. Results: Among four ML algorithms evaluated, Random Forest demonstrated superior performance with the highest accuracy (0.87 ± 0.12), sensitivity (0.90 ± 0.18), AUC (0.92 ± 0.09), and lowest Brier score (0.20 ± 0.03), followed by LightGBM, AdaBoost, and XGBoost. The superiority of the Random Forest model was confirmed by paired t-tests, which revealed significantly higher AUC and lower Brier scores compared to all other algorithms (p < 0.05). SHAP analysis identified key metabolomic biomarkers consistently across all models, including glucose, creatine, 1-methylhistidine, homocysteine, and acetone. Low glucose and creatine levels were positively associated with steroid resistance risk, while higher propylene glycol and carnitine concentrations increased SRNS probability. LIME analysis provided patient-specific interpretability, confirming these metabolomic patterns at individual level. The XAI approach successfully identified clinically relevant metabolomic signatures for predicting steroid resistance with high accuracy and interpretability. Conclusions: The present study successfully identified candidate metabolomic biomarkers capable of predicting SRNS prior to treatment initiation and elucidating critical molecular mechanisms underlying steroid resistance regulation.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticalsSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207