MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793003004 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-17-2243

A Novel Method for Rapid Molecular Subgrouping of Medulloblastoma

2018· article· en· W2793003004 on OpenAlexaff
Soledad Gómez‐González, Alícia Garrido-Garcia, Laura Garcia-Gerique, Isadora Lemos, Mariona Suñol, Carmen de Torres, Marta Kulis, Sara Pérez‐Jaume, Ángel M. Carcaboso, Betty Luu, Mark W. Kieran, Nada Jabado, Alexey Kozlenkov, Stella Dracheva, Vijay Ramaswamy, Volker Hovestadt, Pascal D. Johann, David Jones, Stefan M. Pfister, Andrés Morales La Madrid, Ofelia Cruz, Michael D. Taylor, José I. Martín‐Subero, Jaume Mora, Cinzia Lavarino

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsMedulloblastomaDNA methylationBiologyCancer researchMicroarrayMethylationComputational biologyDNA microarrayOncologyBioinformaticsMedicineDNAGeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: The classification of medulloblastoma into WNT, SHH, group 3, and group 4 subgroups has become of critical importance for patient risk stratification and subgroup-tailored clinical trials. Here, we aimed to develop a simplified, clinically applicable classification approach that can be implemented in the majority of centers treating patients with medulloblastoma. Experimental Design: We analyzed 1,577 samples comprising previously published DNA methylation microarray data (913 medulloblastomas, 457 non-medulloblastoma tumors, 85 normal tissues), and 122 frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded medulloblastoma samples. Biomarkers were identified applying stringent selection filters and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) method, and validated using DNA methylation microarray data, bisulfite pyrosequencing, and direct-bisulfite sequencing. Results: Using a LDA-based approach, we developed and validated a prediction method (EpiWNT-SHH classifier) based on six epigenetic biomarkers that allowed for rapid classification of medulloblastoma into the clinically relevant subgroups WNT, SHH, and non-WNT/non-SHH with excellent concordance (>99%) with current gold-standard methods, DNA methylation microarray, and gene signature profiling analysis. The EpiWNT-SHH classifier showed high prediction capacity using both frozen and formalin-fixed material, as well as diverse DNA methylation detection methods. Similarly, we developed a classifier specific for group 3 and group 4 tumors, based on five biomarkers (EpiG3-G4) with good discriminatory capacity, allowing for correct assignment of more than 92% of tumors. EpiWNT-SHH and EpiG3-G4 methylation profiles remained stable across tumor primary, metastasis, and relapse samples. Conclusions: The EpiWNT-SHH and EpiG3-G4 classifiers represent a new simplified approach for accurate, rapid, and cost-effective molecular classification of single medulloblastoma DNA samples, using clinically applicable DNA methylation detection methods. Clin Cancer Res; 24(6); 1355–63. ©2018 AACR.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207