MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599416427 · doi:10.1101/110130

Similarity identification in gene expression patterns as a new approach in phenotype classification

2017· preprint· en· W2599416427 on OpenAlexafffund
Seyed Ali Madani Tonekaboni, Venkata Manem, Nehmé El-Hachem, Benjamin Haibe‐Kains

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research InstitutePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreInstitute of Cancer ResearchOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersGetty ImagesOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchGovernment of OntarioCancer Research Society
KeywordsComputational biologyPhenotypeBiologyBreast cancerGeneGene expression profilingGene expressionBioinformaticsGeneticsCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Stratifying healthy and malignant phenotypes and identifying their biological states using high-throughput molecular data has been the focus of many computational approaches during the last decade. Using multivariate changes in expression of genes within biological pathways, as fingerprints of complex phenotypes, we developed a new methodology for Similarity Identification in Gene expressioN (SIGN). In this approach, we use centroid classifier to identify phenotype of each biological sample. To obtain similarity of a given biological sample with classes of phenotypes, we defined a new distance measure, transcriptional similarity coefficient (TSC) which captures similarity of gene expression patterns between a biological pathway in two samples or populations. We showed that TSC, as an interpretable and stable distance measure in SIGN, captures all oncogenic hallmarks for breast cancer even with low sample size, by comparing healthy and patient tumor samples in the largest breast cancer dataset. In this study, we demonstrate that SIGN is a flexible, yet robust approach for classification based on transcriptomics data. Comparing early and late relapses within each molecular subtypes of breast cancer, our method enabled subtype-specific stratification of breast cancer patients into groups with significantly different survival. Moreover, we used SIGN to classify with more than 99% specificity the site of extraction of healthy and tumor samples from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets. We showed that SIGN also enables robust identification of hematopoietic stem cell and progenitors within the hematopoietic hierarchy. We further explored chemical perturbation data in the Connectivity Map (CMAP) database and showed that SIGN was able to classify seven classes of drugs based on their mechanism of action. In conclusion, we showed that SIGN can be used to achieve interpretable and robust transcriptomic-based classification of healthy and malignant samples, as well as drugs based on their known mechanism of action, supporting the generalizability and relevance of the method for the analysis of gene expression profiles.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207