Dataset Information

Word Embedding Reveals Cyfra 21-1 as a Biomarker for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experience high morbidity and mortality worldwide, few biomarkers are available for COPD. Here, we analyzed potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of COPD by using word embedding.

Methods

To determine which biomarkers are likely to be associated with COPD, we selected respiratory disease-related biomarkers. Degrees of similarity between the 26 selected biomarkers and COPD were measured by word embedding. And we infer the similarity with COPD through the word embedding model trained in the large-capacity medical corpus, and search for biomarkers with high similarity among them. We used Word2Vec, Canonical Correlation Analysis, and Global Vector for word embedding. We evaluated the associations of selected biomarkers with COPD parameters in a cohort of patients with COPD.

Results

Cytokeratin 19 fragment (Cyfra 21-1) was selected because of its high similarity and its significant correlation with the COPD phenotype. Serum Cyfra 21-1 levels were determined in patients with COPD and controls (4.3 ± 5.9 vs. 3.9 ± 3.6 ng/mL, P = 0.611). The emphysema index was significantly correlated with the serum Cyfra 21-1 level (correlation coefficient = 0.219, P = 0.015).

Conclusion

Word embedding may be used for the discovery of biomarkers for COPD and Cyfra 21-1 may be used as a biomarker for emphysema. Additional studies are needed to validate Cyfra 21-1 as a biomarker for COPD.

SUBMITTER: Heo J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8422037 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This paper presents a rapid review of the literature for the components, benefits, barriers, and facilitators of pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) people in-home and community-based settings. seventy-six studies were included: 57 home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HBPR) studies and 19 community-based pulmonary rehabilitation (CBPR) studies. The benefits of HBPR on exercise capacity and health-related quality of life were observed in one-group studies, studies comparing HBPR to usual care, and studies comparing to hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation, although the benefits were less pronounced in the latter. HBPR reduced hospital admissions compared to usual care and was more cost-effective than hospital pulmonary rehabilitation. Most HBPRs were designed with low-density or customized equipment, are minimally supervised, and have a low intensity of training. Although the HBPR has flexibility and no travel burden, participants with severe disease, physical frailty, and complex comorbidities had barriers to complying with HBPR. The telerehabilitation program, a facilitator for HBPR, is feasible and safe. CBPR was offered in-person supervision, despite being limited to physical therapists in most studies. Benefits in exercise capacity were shown in almost all studies, but the improvement in health-related quality of life was controversial. Patients reported the benefits that facilities where they attended the CBPR including social support and the presence of an instructor. They also reported barriers, such as poor physical condition, transport difficulties, and family commitments. Despite the minimal infrastructure offered, HBPR and CBPR are feasible, safe, and provide clinical benefits to patients with COPD. Home and community settings are excellent opportunities to expand the offer of pulmonary rehabilitation programs, as long as they follow protocols that ensure quality and safety following current guidelines.