ArticleJournal of inflammation research2026
SULF1 and EPB41L3: Potential Biomarkers of Acute Myocardial Infarction and the Vascular Inflammatory Milieu.
Article in Journal of inflammation research, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Coronary endothelial dysfunction is considered one of the key pathological components in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This study aimed to explore the expression patterns and potential significance of the differentially expressed genes SULF1 and EPB41L3 in AMI by integrating bioinformatics analysis and clinical validation. Methods: Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were screened from two public microarray datasets (GSE66360 and GSE132651). Their functional profiles were summarized via Gene Ontology and pathway analysis. In parallel, whole-blood samples from 29 patients with coronary artery disease were collected, and gene expression was measured using quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). Multivariate logistic regression was adjusted, and bootstrap resampling was applied to assess robustness. Exploratory single-cell expression analysis and drug-gene interaction prediction were also performed. Results: Bioinformatics analysis identified SULF1 and EPB41L3 as consistently upregulated in AMI. In clinical samples, both genes showed significantly higher expression in AMI patients compared with non-obstructive coronary artery disease controls (P=0.036 and 0.021), and this association remained significant after multivariate adjustment (P=0.039 and 0.034). Single-cell data indicated expression in endothelial cells and fibroblasts. Drug prediction suggested metoprolol and paclitaxel as potential modulators of SULF1. Conclusion: This study, through integrated analysis, first validated the upregulated expression of candidate biomarkers SULF1 and EPB41L3 in the peripheral blood of AMI patients within a clinical cohort. Combined with their baseline expression profiles in cell types associated with vascular inflammation such as endothelial cells, these findings suggest that these two genes may be involved in the pathological process of AMI. This research provides new candidate targets and clues for exploring the molecular mechanisms of AMI.
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.