MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract LB-297: Integrative analysis identifies driver lncRNAs in prostate cancer

2015· article· en· W2174841492 on OpenAlexaff
Haiyang Guo, Musaddeque Ahmed, Junjie T. Hua, Yi Liang, Jens Langstein, Housheng Hansen He

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerEpigeneticsGeneBiologyGenome-wide association studyGeneticsCancerGenomeMALAT1GermlineComputational biologyCancer researchLong non-coding RNASingle-nucleotide polymorphismRNAGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) and whole-genome resequencing studies identified thousands of germline risk variants and somatic mutations in cancer. However, efforts to interpret these data have mainly focused on protein coding genes, despite the fact that majority of these genetic alterations locate outside of coding gene exons. A recent curation of over seven thousand RNA-seq data characterized more than fifty-eight thousand expressed long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) in human genome, twice as large as the number of protein coding genes. In this study, we integrated lncRNA gene expression, epigenetic and genetic alteration data to nominate potential driver lncRNAs in prostate cancer. We have identified eleven lncRNAs that are regulated by risk SNPs and somatic mutations through both cis and trans actions. The function of two of these lncRNAs in prostate cancer development and progression has been characterized. Our data suggests that lncRNAs may function as driving factors in prostate cancer development and progression. Note: This abstract was not presented at the meeting. Citation Format: Haiyang Guo, Musaddeque Ahmed, Junjie Hua, Yi Liang, Jens Langstein, Housheng Hansen He. Integrative analysis identifies driver lncRNAs in prostate cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-297. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-LB-297

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207