MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Genome-Wide Genotype-Based Risk Model for Survival in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients with Normal Karyotype.

2012· article· en· W2558604928 on OpenAlexaff
Hyeoung‐Joon Kim, Hangseok Choi, Yeo‐Kyeoung Kim, Sang Kyun Sohn, Joon Ho Moon, Tae‐Hyung Kim, Zhaolei Zhang, Dennis Dong Hwan Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismProportional hazards modelMinor allele frequencySNPOncologyMyeloid leukemiaBiologyGenome-wide association studyGenotypeLinkage disequilibriumInternal medicineTag SNPGeneticsMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 2526 Introduction: Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) is an inter-individual genetic variation which could explain inter-individual differences of response/survival to chemotherapy. The present study was attempted to build up risk model of survival for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with normal karyotype (AML-NK). Methods and materials: A total of 247 patients with AML-NK was included into the study. Genome-wide SNP array (Affymetrix SNP-array 6.0) was performed in the discovery set (n=118), and genotypes were analyzed for overall survival (OS). After identifying significant SNPs for OS in single SNP analyses, risk model was constructed. Replication was performed in an independent validation cohort (n=129). Results: Out of 632,957 autosomal SNPs meeting genotype data filtration criteria, a total of 82 SNPs were selected and passed into the next step of validation in an independent cohort. In the risk model generation step, finally 4 SNPs (rs2826063, rs12791420, rs11623492 and rs2575369) were meeting stringent criteria for SNP selection as follows: 1) p-value < 0.10 from Cox proportional hazards regression model in adjustment with age and WBC counts at diagnosis; 2) minor allele frequency > 0.05; 3) call rate > 95.0%; 4) high linkage disequilibrium r2 < 0.8. These 4 SNPs were introduced into the risk model, and patients was grouped into 2 groups according to the number of deleterious variables including 4 SNPs and 2 clinical variables (i.e. age and WBC counts at presentation): risk score 0–2 as a low risk (n=80) and 3–6 as a high risk (n=38). The risk model could stratify the patients according to their OS in discovery (p=1.053656•10−4) and in validation set (p=5.38206•10−3). The risk model showed a higher AUC than those being incorporated only clinical or only 4 SNPs, suggesting improved prognostic stratification power of combined model. Conclusion: Genome-wide SNP based risk model obtained from 247 patients with AML-NK can identify high risk group of patients with poor survival using genome wide SNP data. (Clinicaltrials.govIdentifier:NCT01066338) Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→