MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117297561 · doi:10.36838/v7i9.80

Analysis of CD16+/- Monocytes and CD4+ T Cells to Identify Novel Gene Signatures and Develop a Diagnostic Tool for SLE

2025· article· W7117297561 on OpenAlexaff
Maya LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of high school research · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsABB (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneImmune systemAutoimmune diseaseT lymphocyteDiseaseT cellLupus erythematosusGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an incurable chronic autoimmune disease that causes widespread inflammation and organ damage.Due to the lack of a single test to diagnose SLE, doctors use multiple general methods to diagnose the disease.This study evaluated gene expression in CD16 + monocytes, CD16 -monocytes, and CD4 + T lymphocyte cells to identify signatures unique to SLE, to improve diagnostic processes.Gene expression profiles from individuals diagnosed with SLE and females aged 24-29 controls were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus, and 54,675 gene probes were compared between healthy and SLE patients.The top five gene probes with increased differential expression between healthy and SLE patients were associated with the ATP6V0C, UBA1, TGFB1, STAT1, and NFYC genes.Quantile-quantile plots confirmed statistical appropriateness for genetic analysis.Further evaluation determined that the ATP6V0C, UBA1, STAT1, NFYC, and TGFB1 genes associated with the CD16 -monocyte cell type represent a novel gene expression signature for SLE identification.Gene expression ranges were established for these probes, serving as a diagnostic tool for SLE.This tool can detect SLE in a single blood sample, which may improve diagnostic outcomes and reduce healthcare costs.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of high school researchSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207