GENOMIC AND TRANSCRIPTOME PROFILING OF EPITHELIAL OVARIAN CANCER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death by gynecological malignancy. Due to inadequate screening modalities, a lack of characteristic presenting symptoms, limited treatments and a poor understanding of the molecular underpinnings of the disease, only 25% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed at an early stage. Current 5-year survival rates range from 80%, for disease diagnosed in Stage I to as low as 13% for Stage IV. Current screening for ovarian cancer involves measuring CA-125 levels. However, CA-125 testing has low sensitivity since it can be elevated in a variety of other gynecological diseases. Numerous studies have found molecular heterogeneity between the four histological subtypes of ovarian cancer (serous, endometrioid, clear cell and mucinous). However, treatments remain the same for all subtypes regardless of molecular heterogeneity. Thus, better treatment targets and biomarkers must be found for this disease. Methods:In our study 300 ovarian tumors will be genomically profiled using the Affymetrix Genome-Wide SNP Array 6.0 to identify loci and genes implicated in ovarian cancer. To date, 51 ovarian tumors have been analyzed using the SNP array. Results:Preliminary analysis of copy number variation in these tumors using Partek software has revealed a total of 978 loci. Known amplifications derived from the literature were seen at CCNE1 and ERBB2. Similarly, well known deletions ofp53 and RB1 in ovarian cancer were detected. Novel amplified loci at 18q11.2 and 4q33 were also detected. Novel deletions were detected at 7p13 and 8q22.2. Conclusion: Future work will include running the remaining 249 tumor samples on the SNP array and analyzing the complete dataset using Partek software. Future validation of identified genes in vitro and in vivo may provide insight and possible biomarkers that may be used clinically to benefit the ovarian cancer patient.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".