MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580655969 · doi:10.2217/pme-2016-0090

Noncoding RNA for Personalized Prostate Cancer Treatment: Utilizing the ‘Dark Matters’ of the Genome

2017· article· en· W2580655969 on OpenAlexafffund
Junjie T. Hua, Jennifer Lu, Keren Isaev, Fraser Soares, Haiyang Guo, Musaddeque Ahmed, Housheng Hansen He

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonalized Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPrincess Margaret Cancer Foundation
KeywordsProstate cancerTranscriptomeGenomeDiseaseLong non-coding RNACancerPersonalized medicineComputational biologymicroRNAGeneNon-coding RNAMedicineBioinformaticsRNABiologyGeneticsInternal medicineGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men in western countries, with significant health impact. Clinically, it is complicated with the lack of biomarkers and effective treatments for aggressive disease, particularly castration-resistant prostate cancer. Although we have gained much insight into the biology of prostate cancer through studying protein-coding genes, they represent only a small fraction of our genome. Therefore, it is essential for us to investigate noncoding RNAs, which comprise the majority of our transcriptome, in order to achieve a better understanding of prostate cancer and move toward personalized medicine. In this article, we will address recent advancements in our knowledge of noncoding RNAs, and discuss the clinical potentials and challenges of different types of noncoding RNAs in prostate cancer.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonalized MedicineSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207