MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604862741 · doi:10.1002/gcc.22460

Genome‐wide copy number variation pattern analysis and a classification signature for non‐small cell lung cancer

2017· article· en· W2604862741 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zhe‐Wei Qiu, J Faheemunnisa bi, Adi F. Gazdar, Kai Song

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes Chromosomes and Cancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteBC Cancer AgencyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCopy-number variationAdenocarcinomaLung cancerLungCarcinomaBiologyOncologyPathologyMedicineCancerGenomeGeneInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accurate classification of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) into lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) and lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) is essential for both clinical practice and lung cancer research. Although the standard WHO diagnosis of NSCLC on biopsy material is rapid and economic, more than 13% of NSCLC tumors in the USA are not further classified. The purpose of this study was to analyze the genome-wide pattern differences in copy number variations (CNVs) and to develop a CNV signature as an adjunct test for the routine histopathologic classification of NSCLCs. We investigated the genome-wide CNV differences between these two tumor types using three independent patient datasets. Approximately half of the genes examined exhibited significant differences between LUAD and LUSC tumors and the corresponding non-malignant tissues. A new classifier was developed to identify signature genes out of 20 000 genes. Thirty-three genes were identified as a CNV signature of NSCLC. Using only their CNV values, the classification model separated the LUADs from the LUSCs with an accuracy of 0.88 and 0.84, respectively, in the training and validation datasets. The same signature also classified NSCLC tumors from their corresponding non-malignant samples with an accuracy of 0.96 and 0.98, respectively. We also compared the CNV patterns of NSCLC tumors with those of histologically similar tumors arising at other sites, such as the breast, head, and neck, and four additional tumors. Of greater importance, the significant differences between these tumors may offer the possibility of identifying the origin of tumors whose origin is unknown.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations79
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes Chromosomes and CancerSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207