TITAN: inference of copy number architectures in clonal cell populations from tumor whole-genome sequence data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of cancer genomes within a single tumor creates mixed cell populations with divergent somatic mutational landscapes. Inference of tumor subpopulations has been disproportionately focused on the assessment of somatic point mutations, whereas computational methods targeting evolutionary dynamics of copy number alterations (CNA) and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) in whole-genome sequencing data remain underdeveloped. We present a novel probabilistic model, TITAN, to infer CNA and LOH events while accounting for mixtures of cell populations, thereby estimating the proportion of cells harboring each event. We evaluate TITAN on idealized mixtures, simulating clonal populations from whole-genome sequences taken from genomically heterogeneous ovarian tumor sites collected from the same patient. In addition, we show in 23 whole genomes of breast tumors that the inference of CNA and LOH using TITAN critically informs population structure and the nature of the evolving cancer genome. Finally, we experimentally validated subclonal predictions using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and single-cell sequencing from an ovarian cancer patient sample, thereby recapitulating the key modeling assumptions of TITAN.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".