Back

Single time-point multi-dimensional biomarker models can predict acute organ injury trajectory

Humphries, C.; Kilpatrick, A. M.; Scullion, K. M.; Aird, R.; Bruce, L.; Candela, M. E.; Man, T. Y.; Forbes, S. J.; Dear, J. W.

2025-10-07 pharmacology and therapeutics
10.1101/2025.10.06.25337429 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundForecasting acute organ injury trajectory remains a critical clinical challenge. Current approaches rely on serial measurements, delaying decision-making. Using paracetamol-induced liver injury (APAP DILI) as a model, we developed and validated a machine learning framework integrating mechanistically distinct biomarkers to predict injury trajectory from a single timepoint. MethodsWe conducted a biomarker discovery and evaluation study using serum from three UK cohorts: MAPP2 APAP DILI biobank discovery cohort (n=160), independent MAIL trial testing cohort (n=34), and healthy controls (n=13). We measured 63 biomarkers and evaluated 321,682 combinations using kernel naive Bayes classification to predict subsequent ALT trajectory (rising versus falling). FindingsSensitivity analysis found that model performance and stability were optimized by integrating multiple, weakly-correlated (Spearman {rho}<0.5) biomarkers. A seven-biomarker model (CCL5, HMGB1, INR, MCSFR, potassium, sodium, white cell count) predicted injury trajectory with AUC 0.825 (95% CI: 0.685-0.965). InterpretationThis study establishes a generalizable framework demonstrating that robust prognostic models integrate multiple non-collinear biomarkers reflecting distinct biological pathways. This mechanistic triangulation approach provides a systematic route for the translation high-dimensional datasets into clinically tractable tests, with potential applications in sepsis, acute kidney injury, and other acute conditions requiring early patient stratification. FundingChief Scientist Office, Scotland (PMAS/21/07); UK Medical Research Council (MR/T044802/1).

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.