MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2767284193 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox168.389

GENE-15. CHARACTERIZATION OF DIFFERENTIAL 5-HYDROXYMETHYLCYTOSINE IN IDH1 MUTANT VERSUS IDH1 WILD-TYPE HIGH-GRADE GLIOMAS

2017· article· en· W2767284193 on OpenAlexaff
Wioletta K. Glowacka, Harshika Jain, Makiko Okura, Abulizi Maimaitiming, Yasin Mamatjan, Hamza Farooq, Kenneth Aldape, Paul Kongkham

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMutantIDH1EpigeneticsWild type5-HydroxymethylcytosineGeneDNA methylationGliomaCpG sitePhenotypeMolecular biologyMethylationGeneticsGene expressionCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glioblastoma demonstrates significant epigenetic dysregulation, with subgroup differences highlighted by the Glioma CpG-island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP) seen in IDH1 mutant tumors. 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) has been implicated in IDH1 wild-type tumors (Johnson et al, Nat Commun Nov 2016), however its role in IDH1 mutant gliomas remains undescribed. We examined the 5hmC and methylcytosine (5mC) profiles in high grade (WHO III/IV) IDH1 mutant (n = 12) and IDH1 wild-type (n = 9) tumors using the Illumina EPIC platform. Gene expression was profiled using the Affymetrix Human Gene 2.0 ST array. Cumulative density plots for mean 5hmC across IDH1 mutant samples demonstrated 5hmC accumulation within the last 10th percentile. To focus on probes with greatest 5hmC abundance, we assessed probes in the top 1% mean 5hmC. In addition, differentially methylated (DMR) and hydroxymethylated (DHMR) regions were identified using the R package “ChAMP” comparing IDH1 mutant to wild-type tumors. No significant difference in 5hmC between groups was evident, with a mean 5hmC of 18.9% and 15.7% for IDH1 mutant and wild-type, respectively. Top 1% 5hmC probes preferentially marked Open Sea and CpG island shores and predominantly associated with intronic genomic regions. Enhancer probes were enriched in both subgroups. Of genes defining the G-CIMP phenotype, 28/50 were differentially methylated, while 22/50 G-CIMP genes were differentially hydroxymethylated suggesting that 5hmC may contribute to aberrant methylation defining G-CIMP tumors. Among 1367 differentially expressed genes, 48 demonstrated positive Spearman correlation between 5hmC and gene expression (r=0.5 or greater, p < 0.05) including genes implicated in gliomagenesis and novel candidates. FAM171B demonstrated the highest correlation (r = 0.80, p = 0.00002). DHMR genes were enriched for members of several biologic processes (including nervous system development, cell adhesion, cell-cell signalling, cell differentiation, response to hypoxia) and pathways (including ERK signalling, Wnt/Hedgehog/Notch signalling, targets of C-MYC transcriptional regression).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology→Same topicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation→French-language works237,207→