MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794415758 · doi:10.1002/anie.201800455

Combinatorial Probes for High‐Throughput Electrochemical Analysis of Circulating Nucleic Acids in Clinical Samples

2018· article· en· W2794415758 on OpenAlexafffund
Jagotamoy Das, Ivaylo Ivanov, Tina Saberi Safaei, Edward H. Sargent, Shana O. Kelley

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie International Edition · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNucleic acidMutantPoint mutationMutationGeneComputational biologyBiologyDNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of circulating tumour nucleic acids (ctNAs) provides a minimally invasive way to assess the mutational spectrum of a tumour. However, effective and practical methods for analyzing this emerging class of markers are lacking. Analysis of ctNAs using a sensor-based approach has notable challenges, as it is vital to differentiate nucleic acids from normal cells from mutation-bearing sequences emerging from tumours. Moreover, many genes related to cancer have dozens of different mutations. Herein, we report an electrochemical approach that directly detects genes with mutations in patient serum by using combinatorial probes (CPs). The CPs enable detection of all of the mutant alleles derived from the same part of the gene. As a proof of concept, we analyze mutations of the EGFR gene, which has more than 40 clinically relevant alterations that include deletions, insertions, and point mutations. Our CP-based approach accurately detects mutant sequences directly in patient serum.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations76
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte Chemie International EditionSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207