From bench to bedside: current and future applications of molecular profiling in renal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among the adult population, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) constitutes the most prevalent form of kidney neoplasm. Unfortunately, RCC is relatively asymptomatic and there are no tumor markers available for diagnostic, prognostic or predictive purposes. Molecular profiling, the global analysis of gene and protein expression profiles, is an emerging promising tool for new biomarker identification in RCC. In this review, we summarize the existing knowledge on RCC regarding clinical presentation, treatment options, and tumor marker status. We present a general overview of the more commonly used approaches for molecular profiling at the genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic levels. We also highlight the emerging role of molecular profiling as not only revolutionizing the process of new tumor marker discovery, but also for providing a better understanding of the pathogenesis of RCC that will pave the way towards new targeted therapy discovery. Furthermore, we discuss the spectrum of clinical applications of molecular profiling in RCC in the current literature. Finally, we highlight some of the potential challenging that faces the era of molecular profiling and its transition into clinical practice, and provide an insight about the future perspectives of molecular profiling in RCC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".