Investigating the Link Between Intrarenal Complement Expression and Proteinuric Chronic Kidney Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major healthcare challenge. Evidence suggests that thecomplement system may represent a key shared pathway involved in proteinuric CKD progression, regardless of the underlying cause. Studies suggest that during proteinuria, circulating complement proteins leak into the tubular space, causing tubular damage. Additionally, it is speculated that during proteinuria, tubular cells synthesize complement proteins that become locally activated, further contributing to tubular pathology. Therefore, we aimed to explore the link between complement, specifically intrarenal complement expression, and proteinuric CKD. We hypothesized that intrarenal complement expression is a key shared mechanism involved in the progression of proteinuric CKDs. We demonstrated constitutive renal expressions of complement transcripts, with upregulation in patients with various proteinuric CKDs. Additionally, we showed correlation between tubular complement expressions and poor renal outcomes. Ultimately, we demonstrated a link between complement and proteinuric CKDs, thus supporting complement as a potential therapeutic target.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".