MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2790395058 · doi:10.1101/243477

BAP1 Loss Predicts Therapeutic Vulnerability in Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma

2018· preprint· en· W2790395058 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBC Cancer FoundationMitacs
KeywordsPeritoneal mesotheliomaMesotheliomaImmune systemDiseaseImmune checkpointCytoreductive surgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma (PeM) is a rare but frequently fatal cancer that originates from the peritoneal lining of the abdomen. Standard treatment of PeM is limited to cytoreductive surgery and/or chemotherapy, and no effective targeted therapies for PeM yet exist. In the search for novel therapeutic target candidates in PeM, we performed a comprehensive integrative multi-omics analysis of 19 treatment-naïve PeM tumors. Results The analysis identified PeM tumors with BAP1 loss to form a distinct molecular subtype characterized by distinct expression patterns of genes involved in chromatin remodeling, DNA repair pathway, and immune checkpoint receptor activation. This PeM subtype could potentially benefit from immune checkpoint, PARP, or HDAC inhibition therapies. Conclusions Our findings uncover BAP1 as a trackable prognostic and predictive biomarker, and refine PeM disease classification. This integrated molecular characterization provides a comprehensive foundation for developing PeM precision medicine.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicOccupational and environmental lung diseases→French-language works237,207→