MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2575338530 · doi:10.1182/blood.v104.11.701.701

Lymphdx: A Custom Microarray for Molecular Diagnosis and Prognosis in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

2004· article· en· W2575338530 on OpenAlexaff
Sandeep S. Davé, George W. Wright, Bruce K. Tan, Andreas Rosenwald, WP Chan, T. C. Greiner, DD Weisenburger, James C. Lynch, Julie M. Vose, Jamés O. Armitage, Richard I. Fisher, Rita M. Braziel, Lisa M. Rimsza, Thomas M. Grogan, Thomas P. Miller, Michael LeBlanc, Erlend B. Smeland, Stein Kvaløy, Harald Holte, Jan Delabie, H. K. Müller-Hermelink, German Ott, Randy D. Gascoyne, Joseph M. Connors, Elı́as Campo, E Montserrat, Wyndham H. Wilson, Elaine S. Jaffe, T. Andrew Lister, Alex Davies, A. J. Norton, Richard Simon, Liangcheng Yang, John Powell, John Palma, Janer Warrington, Hong Zhao, Michael Chiorazzi, Louis M. Staudt

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollicular lymphomaLymphomaGerminal centerMantle cell lymphomaDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaMicroarraySignificance analysis of microarraysCancer researchDNA microarrayBiologyGene expression profilingGeneB cellGene expressionImmunologyGeneticsAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Clinical management differs significantly for the various types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and the diagnosis of these lymphomas can be challenging in some cases. Further, existing NHL categories include subgroups that can differ substantially in gene expression, response to therapy and overall survival. We have created a custom oligonucleotide microarray, named LymphDx, which could prove clinically useful for molecular diagnosis and outcome prediction in NHL. Biopsy specimens were obtained from 559 patients with a variety of lymphomas and lymphoproliferative conditions. Gene expression profiles of these samples were obtained using Affymetrix U133 A and B microarrays. The 2653 genes on LymphDx were chosen to include:(1)Genes most differentially expressed among NHL types based on Affymetrix U133 or Lymphochip microarrays (2)Genes predicting length of survival in diffuse large B cell lymphoma(DLBCL), follicular lymphoma(FL) and mantle cell lymphoma(MCL) (3)Genes encoded in the EBV and HHV-8 viral genomes (4)Genes encoding all known surface markers, kinases, cytokines and their receptors, as well as oncogenes, tumor suppressors, and other genes relevant to lymphoma. The LymphDx microarray was used to profile gene expression in 434 biopsy samples. These data were used to create a diagnostic algorithm that can distinguish various NHL types and benign follicular hyperplasia(FH) based on gene expression. The algorithm classifies a sample into one of the following categories: Burkitt’s lymphoma(BL), DLBCL, FL, MCL, small lymphocytic lymphoma(SLL) or FH. The algorithm further distinguishes the 3 recognized DLBCL subgroups: germinal center B cell-like, activated B cell-like or primary mediastinal lymphoma. Using a leave one out, cross validation strategy, the algorithm was found to agree well with the pathology diagnosis (see Figure). Some samples were deemed unclassified when their gene expression did not adequately match with that of any of the NHL categories. For a few samples, the gene expression-based diagnosis and the pathology diagnosis were discordant. Pathology review showed that two NHL types coexisted (eg FL and DLBCL) in many of these cases, potentially explaining the results of the diagnostic algorithm. LymphDx could also reliably predict the overall survival of patients with DLBCL, FL and MCL. Prospective evaluation of the LymphDx microarray is warranted since it could be used to provide objective molecular diagnostic, and prognostic information for patients with NHL. Figure Figure

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→