Unsupervised detection of genes of influence in lung cancer using biological networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Lung cancer is often discovered long after its onset, making identifying genes important in its initiation and progression a challenge. By the time the tumors are discovered, we only observe the final sum of changes of the few genes that initiated cancer and thousands of genes that they have influenced. Gene interactions and heterogeneity of samples make it difficult to identify genes consistent between different cohorts. Using gene and gene-product interaction networks, we propose a principled approach to identify a small subset of genes whose network neighbors exhibit consistently high expression change (in cancerous tissue versus normal) regardless of their own expression. We hypothesize that these genes can shed light on the larger scale perturbations in the overall landscape of expression levels. RESULTS: We benchmark our method on simulated data, and show that we can recover a true gene list in noisy measurement data. We then apply our method to four non-small cell lung cancer and two pancreatic cancer cohorts, finding several genes that are consistent within all cohorts of the same cancer type. CONCLUSION: Our model is flexible, robust and identifies gene sets that are more consistent across cohorts than several other approaches. Additionally, our method can be applied on a per-patient basis not requiring large cohorts of patients to find genes of influence. Our approach is generally applicable to gene expression studies where the goal is to identify a small set of influential genes that may in turn explain the much larger set of genome-wide expression changes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".