MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1523223348 · doi:10.26481/dis.20111125ms

Microarray-based expression signatures: potential application for individualized cancer treatment

2011· dissertation· en· W1523223348 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maud H. W. Starmans

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCenter for Translational Molecular MedicineGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsMicroarrayGene signatureProportional hazards modelOncologyMicroarray analysis techniquesMultivariate statisticsCancerBreast cancerInternal medicineLimitingTissue microarrayMedicineBioinformaticsComputational biologyBiologyGene expressionComputer scienceGeneMachine learningGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter 2 Robust prognostic value of a knowledge-based proliferation signature across large patient microarray studies spanning different cancer types 21 Chapter 3 The use of a comprehensive tumour xenograft dataset to validate gene signatures relevant for radiation response 45 Chapter 4 Validation of a PCR-based proliferation signature in vitro, ex vivo and in patient studies 59 Chapter 5 A simple but highly effective approach to evaluate the prognostic performance of gene expression signatures 81 Chapter 6 Re: Gene expression-based prognostic signatures in lung cancer: ready for clinical use? 105 Chapter 7 Validation of a microarray-based prognostic marker for nonsmall cell lung cancer: sensitivity to data pre-processing 109 Chapter 8 Discussion and future perspectives

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGene expression and cancer classification→French-language works237,207→