MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Discovery of a biomarker signature that predicts upgrading or upstaging in patients with low-risk prostate cancer.

2012· article· en· W2229126747 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Erho, Ismael A. Vergara, Christine Buerki, Mercedeh Ghadessi, Anamaria Crisan, Thomas Sierocinski, Zaid Haddad, Benedikt Zimmermann, Sebastian Harko, Worlanyo Sosu-Sedzorme, Timothy J. Triche, Elai Davicioni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsGenome British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstatectomyStage (stratigraphy)BiomarkerOncologyReceiver operating characteristicCancerBiopsyProstateInternal medicineUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

37 Background: More than 90% of patients diagnosed with organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) choose upfront definitive treatment (e.g., radical surgery) even though many are excellent candidates for delayed therapy (i.e., active surveillance [AS]). Therefore, patients may suffer from the adverse effects of treatment without gaining any benefit. Biomarker signatures that predict tumour aggressiveness are promising tools for identification of patients suited for AS. In this study, we use a transcriptome-wide assay to develop a biomarker signature for patients assessed as low risk at diagnosis who are upgraded or upstaged following radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: Gene expression data of 56 RP samples from the Memorial Sloan Kettering Oncogenome Project (GSE21034) which met the low risk criteria (i.e., biopsy Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6, clinical stage T1 or T2A, and pre-operative PSA (pre-op PSA) ≤ 10 ng/ml) were used to develop the signature. Of these tumors, 31 underwent upgrading or upstaging (defined by pathological GS ≥ 7 or a pathological tumor stage > T3A). In the training set (n = 29) a median fold difference filter (MFD > 1.4) was applied to select features. The top 16 t-test ranked features were modelled with a K-nearest-neighbor (KNN) classifier (k = 3) which predicts upgrading/upstaging events. Results: The KNN was applied to the test set (n = 27) and achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.93, significantly better discrimination than pre-op PSA (AUC = 0.52) or tumor stage (AUC = 0.63). Compared to the null model’s accuracy of 56%, the KNN correctly predicts 81% (p-value < 0.005) of the upgrading/upstaging events. In multivariable analysis with pre-op PSA, tumor stage, and age at diagnosis, the KNN remained the only significant (p < 0.05) factor with an odds ratio of 2.7. Conclusions: A 16 marker signature was identified from RP specimens and shown to accurately segregate true low risk patients from those which transitioned to higher risk. Validation studies of this signature in prospectively designed cohorts of active surveillance candidates are underway to determine if the molecular signature can improve treatment and management decisions for low risk PCa patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→