An RCOR1 loss–associated gene expression signature identifies a prognostically significant DLBCL subgroup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is plagued by heterogeneous responses to standard therapy, and molecular mechanisms underlying unfavorable outcomes in lymphoma patients remain elusive. Here, we profiled 148 genomes with 91 matching transcriptomes in a DLBCL cohort treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP) to uncover molecular subgroups linked to treatment failure. Systematic integration of high-resolution genotyping arrays and RNA sequencing data revealed novel deletions in RCOR1 to be associated with unfavorable progression-free survival (P = .001). Integration of expression data from the clinical samples with data from RCOR1 knockdowns in the lymphoma cell lines KM-H2 and Raji yielded an RCOR1 loss-associated gene signature comprising 233 genes. This signature identified a subgroup of patients with unfavorable overall survival (P = .023). The prognostic significance of the 233-gene signature for overall survival was reproduced in an independent cohort comprising 195 R-CHOP-treated patients (P = .039). Additionally, we discovered that within the International Prognostic Index low-risk group, the gene signature provides additional prognostic value that was independent of the cell-of-origin phenotype. We present a novel and reproducible molecular subgroup of DLBCL that impacts risk-stratification of R-CHOP-treated DLBCL patients and reveals a possible new avenue for therapeutic intervention strategies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".