MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

RNA-sequencing to identify three different molecular grades and immune checkpoint cascades with distinct clinical behaviour in NMIBC.

2018· article· en· W2789800123 on OpenAlexaff
Thenappan Chandrasekar, Alexandre R. Zlotta, Jess Shen, Aidan P. Noon, Haiyan Jiang, Annette Erlich, Cynthia Kuk, Ruoyu Ni, Balram Sukhu, Kin Chan, Morgan Rouprêt, Thomas Seisen, Éva Compérat, Joan Sweet, Girish S. Kulkarni, Neil Fleshner, Azar Azad, Theodorus van der Kwast, Jeffrey L. Wrana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGrading (engineering)Immune checkpointBladder cancerOncologyNeuroblastoma RAS viral oncogene homologCancer researchInternal medicineCancerBiologyKRASImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

412 Background: NMIBC has a highly variable clinical behavior not adequately predicted by histological grade or clinical parameters. Some are indolent; others quickly progress to MIBC. Discrepancies between phenotype and genotype is compounded further by interobserver variability in pathological grading. There is an unmet need to improve the prediction of NMIBC. Methods: Whole transcriptomic analysis of 178 bladder tumors (158 NMIBC, 20 MIBC/metastatic) was performed from FFPE tissue incorporating messenger RNA expression, splice variants, gene fusion, mutation detection and immune checkpoint inhibitor cascades. CTLA, PD-1, LAG3, TIM3, TIGIT and B7 were compiled as an index including all major cascade genes. Data were integrated and tested for correlations with pathological grading and clinical outcomes. Conventional pathological grading for WHO 1973 (Grade 1, 2, 3) and 2004 (LG vs HG) classifications was reviewed by 3 expert uro-pathologists. Kappa statistic for interobserver variability was calculated. For validation we used an independent RNA-seq dataset (n = 209, Hedegaard et al. 2016 Cancer Cell). Results: Unsupervised clustering of RNA-Seq data distinguished 3 molecular subtypes of NMIBC; Molecular Grade Related Index (MGRI) 1, MGRI2, MGRI3. MGRI1 comprised of almost exclusively LG tumors. MGRI3 clustered with HG MIBC. Kappa for interobserver variability of expert pathologists was 0.40 and 0.78 in 1973 and 2004 WHO classification, respectively. FGFR3 mutations, FGFR3::TACC3 fusion events and MGRI1 genes were associated with components of xenobiotic metabolism (p = 2.51x10-09) signalling systems, in particular, GTPase regulation (p = 0.002), respiratory cycle genes (p = 0.004), HOX cluster (p = 0.005). MGRI independently predicted progression to MIBC (n = 138, HR = 2.96, 95%CI = 1.70-5.13, p = 1.20x10-04). 5-year PFS in a combined data set (n = 347) differed significantly for MGRI1 (100%) vs MGRI2 (92.2%) vs MGRI3 (73.5%, p = 1.99x10-05, Gray’s test). PD-1 ICC independently predicted progression (OR = 2.85, p < 0.05). Conclusions: RNA-seq delineates 3 molecular classes of NMIBC with different risks of progression to MIBC compared to conventional histologic grading.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→