ArticleComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Identification of Nine mRNA Signatures for Sepsis Using Random Forest.
Article in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Three-dimensional label-free morphology of CD8 + T cells as a sepsis biomarker.Light, science & applications · 2023Article
- Multi-omic Profiling Reveals Early Immunological Indicators for Identifying COVID-19 Progressors.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- The 'analysis of gene expression and biomarkers for point-of-care decision support in Sepsis' study; temporal clinical parameter analysis and validation of early diagnostic biomarker signatures for severe inflammation andsepsis-SIRS discrimination.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis has high fatality rates. Early diagnosis could increase its curating rates. There were no reliable molecular biomarkers to distinguish between infected and uninfected patients currently, which limit the treatment of sepsis. To this end, we analyzed gene expression datasets from the GEO database to identify its mRNA signature. First, two gene expression datasets (GSE154918 and GSE131761) were downloaded to identify the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) using Limma package. Totally 384 common DEGs were found in three contrast groups. We found that as the condition worsens, more genes were under disorder condition. Then, random forest model was performed with expression matrix of all genes as feature and disease state as label. After which 279 genes were left. We further analyzed the functions of 279 important DEGs, and their potential biological roles mainly focused on neutrophil threshing, neutrophil activation involved in immune response, neutrophil-mediated immunity, RAGE receptor binding, long-chain fatty acid binding, specific granule, tertiary granule, and secretory granule lumen. Finally, the top nine mRNAs (MCEMP1, PSTPIP2, CD177, GCA, NDUFAF1, CLIC1, UFD1, SEPT9, and UBE2A) associated with sepsis were considered as signatures for distinguishing between sepsis and healthy controls. Based on 5-fold cross-validation and leave-one-out cross-validation, the nine mRNA signature showed very high AUC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.