Plasma MicroRNA Panel to Diagnose Hepatitis B Virus–Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: More than 60% of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) do not receive curative therapy as a result of late clinical presentation and diagnosis. We aimed to identify plasma microRNAs for diagnosing hepatitis B virus (HBV) -related HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma microRNA expression was investigated with three independent cohorts including 934 participants (healthy, chronic hepatitis B, cirrhosis, and HBV-related HCC), recruited between August 2008 and June 2010. First, we used microarray to screen 723 microRNAs in 137 plasma samples for diagnosing HCC. Quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction assay was then applied to evaluate the expression of selected microRNAs. A logistic regression model was constructed using a training cohort (n = 407) and then validated using an independent cohort (n = 390). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: We identified a microRNA panel (miR-122, miR-192, miR-21, miR-223, miR-26a, miR-27a and miR-801) that provided a high diagnostic accuracy of HCC (AUC = 0.864 and 0.888 for training and validation data set, respectively). The satisfactory diagnostic performance of the microRNA panel persisted regardless of disease status (AUCs for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages 0, A, B, and C were 0.888, 0.888, 0.901, and 0.881, respectively). The microRNA panel can also differentiate HCC from healthy (AUC = 0.941), chronic hepatitis B (AUC = 0.842), and cirrhosis (AUC = 0.884), respectively. CONCLUSION: We found a plasma microRNA panel that has considerable clinical value in diagnosing early-stage HCC. Thus, patients who would have otherwise missed the curative treatment window can benefit from optimal therapy.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 it