MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741481767 · doi:10.1002/em.22114

The TGx‐28.65 biomarker online application for analysis of transcriptomics data to identify DNA damage‐inducing chemicals in human cell cultures

2017· article· en· W2741481767 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus Jackson, Longlong Yang, Isabel A. Lea, Asif Rashid, Byron Kuo, Andrew Williams, Carole L. Yauk, Jennifer Fostel

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental and Molecular Mutagenesis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiomarkerComputational biologyContext (archaeology)BiologyToxicogenomicsCluster analysisDNA damageDNA microarrayTranscriptomeComputer scienceGene expressionBioinformaticsGeneData miningGeneticsDNAMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The TGx-28.65 biomarker is a 65-gene expression profile generated from testing 28 model chemicals (13 that cause DNA damage and 15 that do not) in human TK6 cells. It is used to predict whether a chemical induces DNA damage or not. We expanded availability to the biomarker by developing the online TGx-28.65 biomarker application for predicting the DNA damage inducing (DDI) potential of suspect toxicants tested in p53-proficient human cells and assessing putative mode(s) of action (MOA). Applications like this that analyse gene expression data to predict the hazard potential of test chemicals hold great promise for risk assessment paradigms. The TGx-28.65 biomarker interfaces with an analytical tool to predict the probability that a test chemical can directly or indirectly induce DNA damage. User submitted in vitro microarray data are compared to the 28-chemical x 65-gene signature profile and the probability that the data fit the profile for a DDI or a non-DDI (NDDI) chemical is calculated. The results are displayed in the Results Table, which includes the classification probability and hyperlinks to view heatmaps, hierarchical clustering, and principal component analyses of user-input data in the context of the reference profile. The heatmaps and cluster plots, along with the corresponding text data files of fold changes in gene expression and Euclidean distances can be downloaded. Review of the test chemical data in relationship to the biomarker allows rapid identification of key gene alterations associated with DNA damage as well as chemicals in the reference set that produced a similar response. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 58:529-535, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental and Molecular MutagenesisSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207