Distinct and shared three‐dimensional chromosome organization patterns in lymphocytes, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and multiple myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consistent appearance of specific chromosomal translocations in multiple myeloma has suggested that the positioning of chromosomes in the interphase nucleus might play a role in the occurrence of particular chromosomal rearrangements associated with malignant transformation. Using fluorescence in situ hybridization, we have determined the positions of selected chromosome pairs (18 and 19, 9 and 22, 4 and 14, 14 and 16, 11 and 14) in interphase nuclei of myeloma cells compared to normal lymphocytes of treatment-naïve patients. All chromosome pairs were arranged in a nonrandom pattern. Chromosomes commonly involved in myeloma-associated translocations (4 and 14, 14 and 16, 11 and 14) were found in close spatial proximity, and this is correlated with the occurrence of overlapping chromosome territories. The spatial distribution of chromosomes may increase the possibility of chromosomal translocations in multiple myeloma.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".