Validation of micro <scp>RNA</scp> pathway polymorphisms in esophageal adenocarcinoma survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polymorphisms in miRNA and miRNA pathway genes have been previously associated with cancer risk and outcome, but have not been studied in esophageal adenocarcinoma outcomes. Here, we evaluate candidate miRNA pathway polymorphisms in esophageal adenocarcinoma prognosis and attempt to validate them in an independent cohort of esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. Among 231 esophageal adenocarcinoma patients of all stages/treatment plans, 38 candidate genetic polymorphisms (17 biogenesis, 9 miRNA targets, 5 pri-miRNA, 7 pre-miRNA) were genotyped and analyzed. Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinicopathological covariates helped assess the association of genetic polymorphisms with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Significantly associated polymorphisms were then evaluated in an independent cohort of 137 esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. Among the 231 discovery cohort patients, 86% were male, median diagnosis age was 64 years, 34% were metastatic at diagnosis, and median OS and PFS were 20 and 12 months, respectively. GEMIN3 rs197412 (aHR = 1.37, 95%CI: [1.04-1.80]; P = 0.02), hsa-mir-124-1 rs531564 (aHR = 0.60, 95% CI: [0.53-0.90]; P = 0.05), and KIAA0423 rs1053667 (aHR = 0.51, 95% CI: [0.28-0.96]; P = 0.04) were found associated with OS. Furthermore, GEMIN3 rs197412 (aHR = 1.33, 95% CI: [1.03-1.74]; P = 0.03) and KRT81 rs3660 (aHR = 1.29, 95% CI: [1.01-1.64]; P = 0.04) were found associated with PFS. Although none of these polymorphisms were significant in the second cohort, hsa-mir-124-1 rs531564 and KIAA0423 rs1053667 had trends in the same direction; when both cohorts were combined together, GEMIN3 rs197412, hsa-mir-124-1 rs531564, and KIAA0423 rs1053667 remained significantly associated with OS. We demonstrate the association of multiple miRNA pathway polymorphisms with esophageal adenocarcinoma prognosis in a discovery cohort of patients, which did not validate in a separate cohort but had consistent associations in the pooled cohort. Larger studies are required to confirm/validate the prognostic value of these polymorphisms in esophageal adenocarcinoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".