ArticleJournal of proteome research2026
Feasibility of Integrating Urinary Proteomics and Machine Learning for Diagnosing Diabetic Nephropathy.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biomarkers in Diabetic Kidney Disease: Early Detection, Prognostic Assessment, and Integration with Multi-Omics Signatures.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetic nephropathy (DN) represents the predominant microvascular complication associated with diabetes mellitus; however, existing diagnostic techniques are inadequate. This study evaluated candidate urinary protein biomarkers for diagnosing DN. A cohort comprising 59 patients with type 2 diabetes, 60 patients with DN, and 60 healthy volunteers was recruited. Urine proteomics was utilized to investigate differential protein expression levels among various patient groups and to identify potential biomarkers in conjunction with data analysis from the gene expression omnibus database. Machine learning classification methods were utilized to construct differential diagnosis models for DN. The data set IPX0003092000 was used to validate these diagnostic models. Six potential biomarkers─SERPINF1, FABP4, CP, CFB, C4A, and A1BG─were identified. The diagnostic models for DN, constructed by using machine learning algorithms, demonstrated robust diagnostic performance. Notably, models employing the glmnet, plr, and ranger classification methods achieved AUC values exceeding 0.800 in both the training and test data sets. In the validation cohort, the AUC values for models constructed using the ranger, glmnet, and plr methods were 0.928, 0.942, and 0.850, respectively. We evaluated six candidate urinary biomarkers (SERPINF1, FABP4, CP, CFB, C4A, and A1BG) using urinary proteomics and developed a diagnostic model for DN using machine learning algorithms.
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.