Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Cross-Tissue Analysis Using Machine Learning to Identify Novel Biomarkers for Knee Osteoarthritis

Zhao Y., Xia Y., Kuang G., Cao J., Shen F., Zhu M.

Laboratory Study on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in Comput Math Methods Med (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
Comput Math Methods Med (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35785145
PMCID
PMC9246600
DOI
10.1155/2022/9043300
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

Background Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common degenerative joint disease. In this study, we aimed to identify new biomarkers of KOA to improve the accuracy of diagnosis and treatment. Methods GSE98918 and GSE51588 were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database as training sets, with a total of 74 samples. Gene differences were analyzed by Gene Ontology, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway, and Disease Ontology enrichment analyses for the differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and GSEA enrichment analysis was carried out for the training gene set. Through least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis, the support vector machine recursive feature elimination algorithm, and gene expression screening, the range of DEGs was further reduced. Immune infiltration analysis was carried out, and the prediction results of the combined biomarker logistic regression model were verified with GSE55457. Results In total, 84 DEGs were identified through differential gene expression analysis. The five biomarkers that were screened further showed significant differences in cartilage, subchondral bone, and synovial tissue. The diagnostic accuracy of the model synthesized using five biomarkers through logistic regression was better than that of a single biomarker and significantly better than that of a single clinical trait. Conclusions CX3CR1, SLC7A5,

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
HumansOsteoarthritis, KneeADP-Ribosylation FactorsGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksBiomarkersSupport Vector Machine

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research