RNA-seq analysis of 2 closely related leukemia clones that differ in their self-renewal capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The molecular mechanisms regulating self-renewal of leukemia stem cells remain poorly understood. Here we report the generation of 2 closely related leukemias created through the retroviral overexpression of Meis1 and Hoxa9. Despite their apparent common origin, these clonal leukemias exhibit enormous differences in stem cell frequency (from 1 in 1.4, FLA2; to 1 in 347, FLB1), suggesting that one of these leukemias undergoes nearly unlimited self-renewal divisions. Using next-generation RNA-sequencing, we characterized the transcriptomes of these phenotypically similar, but biologically distinct, leukemias, identifying hundreds of differentially expressed genes and a large number of structural differences (eg, alternative splicing and promoter usage). Focusing on ligand-receptor pairs, we observed high expression levels of Sdf1-Cxcr4; Jagged2-Notch2/1; Osm-Gp130; Scf-cKit; and Bmp15-Tgfb1/2. Interestingly, the integrin beta 2-like gene (Itgb2l) is both highly expressed and differentially expressed between our 2 leukemias (∼ 14-fold higher in FLA2 than FLB1). In addition, gene ontology analysis indicated G-protein-coupled receptor had a much higher proportion of differential expression (22%) compared with other classes (∼ 5%), suggesting a potential role regulating subtle changes in cellular behavior. These results provide the first comprehensive transcriptome analysis of a leukemia stem cell and document an unexpected level of transcriptome variation between phenotypically similar leukemic cells.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".