Derivation of marker gene signatures from human skin and their use in the interpretation of the transcriptional changes associated with dermatological disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous studies have explored the altered transcriptional landscape associated with skin diseases to understand the nature of these disorders. However, data interpretation represents a significant challenge due to a lack of good maker sets for many of the specialized cell types that make up this tissue, whose composition may fundamentally alter during disease. Here we have sought to derive expression signatures that define the various cell types and structures that make up human skin, and demonstrate how they can be used to aid the interpretation of transcriptomic data derived from this organ. Two large normal skin transcriptomic datasets were identified, one RNA-seq (n = 578), the other microarray (n = 165), quality controlled and subjected separately to network-based analyses to identify clusters of robustly co-expressed genes. The biological significance of these clusters was then assigned using a combination of bioinformatics analyses, literature, and expert review. After cross comparison between analyses, 20 gene signatures were defined. These included expression signatures for hair follicles, glands (sebaceous, sweat, apocrine), keratinocytes, melanocytes, endothelia, muscle, adipocytes, immune cells, and a number of pathway systems. Collectively, we have named this resource SkinSig. SkinSig was then used in the analysis of transcriptomic datasets for 18 skin conditions, providing in-context interpretation of these data. For instance, conventional analysis has shown there to be a decrease in keratinization and fatty metabolism with age; we more accurately define these changes to be due to loss of hair follicles and sebaceous glands. SkinSig also highlighted the over-/under-representation of various cell types in skin diseases, reflecting an influx in immune cells in inflammatory disorders and a relative reduction in other cell types. Overall, our analyses demonstrate the value of this new resource in defining the functional profile of skin cell types and appendages, and in improving the interpretation of disease data. © 2016 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".