ArticleSpinal cord2026
Machine learning-based identification of potential diagnostic signatures in spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designBioinformatics analysis.
objectivesTo explore the diagnostic signatures for patients with spinal cord injury (SCI).
settingShenyang, China.
methodsAfter DEGs screening, WGCNA was employed to screen the SCI-related genes. Then the SCI-related genes were intersected with DEGs and PANoptosis-related genes, and DPRGs were obtained, followed by PPI network construction. Diagnostic genes were identified by machine learning, followed by nomogram construction, immune infiltration analysis, GSEA, mRNA-miRNA and mRNA-TF networks establishment, and potential drugs screening.
resultsTotal 277 PANoptosis-related genes, 3269 DEGs, and 1417 SCI-related genes were identified, and intersection analysis yielded 28 intersection genes, which were considered DPRGs. Subsequently, seven diagnostic genes were identified by machine learning, namely FASLG, AVEN, PSMB3, EXOG, CASP4, CASP5, and TLR4. The CASP4 and TLR4 were both enriched in Toll-like receptor signaling pathway and NOD-like receptor signaling pathway, etc. Seventeen immune cells shown significant difference between SCI and control samples, including macrophage, activated dendritic cell, and neutrophil, etc. CASP4 and TLR4 were strongly associated with macrophage, activated dendritic cell and neutrophil, etc. The nomogram of CASP4 and TLR4 was constructed with powerful predictive accuracy. Finally, the potential drugs were predicted, including emricasan, neoceptin-3, and resatorvid, etc.
conclusionsSeven PANoptosis-related genes, namely FASLG, AVEN, PSMB3, EXOG, CASP4, CASP5, and TLR4, and the constructed nomogram based on CASP4 and TLR4 might viable diagnostic signatures for SCI, and conducive to the prevention and diagnosis of SCI in clinical practice. SPONSORSHIP: This work was supported by Liaoning Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 2024-MSLH-538). I want to reiterate that there is no prior publication of figures or tables and no conflict of interest in the submission of this manuscript.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41760790What 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.