MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010886455 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m111.337196

1H NMR Metabolomics Analysis of Glioblastoma Subtypes

2012· article· en· W2010886455 on OpenAlexafffund
Miroslava Čuperlović‐Culf, Dean Ferguson, Adrian S. Culf, Pier Morin, Mohamed Touaibia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsAtlantic Cancer Research InstituteUniversité de MonctonNational Research Council Canada
FundersNew Brunswick Innovation Foundation
KeywordsMetabolomicsGliomaBiologyGene expressionMetaboliteCholineMetabolic networkMetabolic pathwayGeneComputational biologyPhenotypeGene expression profilingGlutamineCancer researchGeneticsBiochemistryBioinformaticsAmino acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common form of malignant glioma, characterized by unpredictable clinical behaviors that suggest distinct molecular subtypes. With the tumor metabolic phenotype being one of the hallmarks of cancer, we have set upon to investigate whether GBMs show differences in their metabolic profiles. 1H NMR analysis was performed on metabolite extracts from a selection of nine glioblastoma cell lines. Analysis was performed directly on spectral data and on relative concentrations of metabolites obtained from spectra using a multivariate regression method developed in this work. Both qualitative and quantitative sample clustering have shown that cell lines can be divided into four groups for which the most significantly different metabolites have been determined. Analysis shows that some of the major cancer metabolic markers (such as choline, lactate, and glutamine) have significantly dissimilar concentrations in different GBM groups. The obtained lists of metabolic markers for subgroups were correlated with gene expression data for the same cell lines. Metabolic analysis generally agrees with gene expression measurements, and in several cases, we have shown in detail how the metabolic results can be correlated with the analysis of gene expression. Combined gene expression and metabolomics analysis have shown differential expression of transporters of metabolic markers in these cells as well as some of the major metabolic pathways leading to accumulation of metabolites. Obtained lists of marker metabolites can be leveraged for subtype determination in glioblastomas. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common form of malignant glioma, characterized by unpredictable clinical behaviors that suggest distinct molecular subtypes. With the tumor metabolic phenotype being one of the hallmarks of cancer, we have set upon to investigate whether GBMs show differences in their metabolic profiles. 1H NMR analysis was performed on metabolite extracts from a selection of nine glioblastoma cell lines. Analysis was performed directly on spectral data and on relative concentrations of metabolites obtained from spectra using a multivariate regression method developed in this work. Both qualitative and quantitative sample clustering have shown that cell lines can be divided into four groups for which the most significantly different metabolites have been determined. Analysis shows that some of the major cancer metabolic markers (such as choline, lactate, and glutamine) have significantly dissimilar concentrations in different GBM groups. The obtained lists of metabolic markers for subgroups were correlated with gene expression data for the same cell lines. Metabolic analysis generally agrees with gene expression measurements, and in several cases, we have shown in detail how the metabolic results can be correlated with the analysis of gene expression. Combined gene expression and metabolomics analysis have shown differential expression of transporters of metabolic markers in these cells as well as some of the major metabolic pathways leading to accumulation of metabolites. Obtained lists of marker metabolites can be leveraged for subtype determination in glioblastomas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations73
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207