A combinatorial approach for analyzing intra-tumor heterogeneity from high-throughput sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: High-throughput sequencing of tumor samples has shown that most tumors exhibit extensive intra-tumor heterogeneity, with multiple subpopulations of tumor cells containing different somatic mutations. Recent studies have quantified this intra-tumor heterogeneity by clustering mutations into subpopulations according to the observed counts of DNA sequencing reads containing the variant allele. However, these clustering approaches do not consider that the population frequencies of different tumor subpopulations are correlated by their shared ancestry in the same population of cells. RESULTS: We introduce the binary tree partition (BTP), a novel combinatorial formulation of the problem of constructing the subpopulations of tumor cells from the variant allele frequencies of somatic mutations. We show that finding a BTP is an NP-complete problem; derive an approximation algorithm for an optimization version of the problem; and present a recursive algorithm to find a BTP with errors in the input. We show that the resulting algorithm outperforms existing clustering approaches on simulated and real sequencing data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Python and MATLAB implementations of our method are available at http://compbio.cs.brown.edu/software/ .
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".