ArticleFrontiers in genetics2026
Integrated clinical and multi-omics analysis links composite inflammatory indices to macrophage-associated molecular programs in aortic dissection.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening vascular disease characterized by high mortality and complex pathophysiology involving inflammation and vascular wall degeneration. Composite inflammatory indices derived from routine blood tests have shown prognostic value in AD; however, their role in disease assessment and their integration with molecular mechanisms remain unclear. Methods: A total of 288 participants (144 AD patients and 144 controls) were enrolled for clinical analysis. Six composite inflammatory indices (NLR, MLR, SIRI, SII, PHR, and AISI) were calculated and evaluated using logistic regression and restricted cubic spline (RCS) models. Generalized propensity score (GPS) weighting was applied to reduce confounding. Multi-omics analyses were conducted by integrating single-cell RNA sequencing (GSE213740), bulk transcriptomic data (GSE153434), and inflammation-related gene sets. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and differential expression analysis were performed to identify candidate genes. Machine learning algorithms (LASSO, random forest, and SVM-RFE) were used for feature selection. External validation (GSE52093) and RT-qPCR experiments were conducted to verify feature genes. Results: All six inflammatory indices were significantly elevated in AD patients (all P < 0.001) and independently associated with AD. RCS analysis revealed distinct nonlinear patterns, with AISI and SII showing continuous dose-response relationships, whereas NLR, MLR, and SIRI exhibited threshold effects. Associations remained robust across subgroups and after GPS weighting, with improved covariate balance (correlation coefficients <0.1). Single-cell analysis identified macrophages as the most prominently altered cell population, with 1,063 differentially expressed genes indicating extensive transcriptional reprogramming. Bulk RNA-seq analysis identified 2,766 DEGs (1,331 upregulated and 1,435 downregulated), and WGCNA revealed a key module (2,551 genes) strongly associated with AD (r = 0.98). Integrative analysis yielded 25 candidate genes, from which four genes (HIF1A, ITGA5, PLAUR, and TLR2) were consistently selected by machine learning. External validation and RT-qPCR confirmed significant upregulation of HIF1A, ITGA5, and PLAUR in AD tissues. Conclusion: Composite inflammatory indices are strongly associated with AD risk, and inflammatory-associated genes, particularly HIF1A, ITGA5, and PLAUR, may serve as potential diagnostic biomarkers and mechanistic targets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.