MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2809886187 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2018.153

P.051 5-hydroxymethylcytosine profiling identifies differential targeting in IDH1 mutant versus IDH1 wild-type high-grade gliomas

2018· article· en· W2809886187 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Wioletta K. Glowacka, H. K. Jain, Mutsumi Okura, Abulizi Maimaitiming, Romina Nejad, Mohammed M. Yasin, Hamza Farooq, Ken Aldape, PN Kongkham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsSystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)Toronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutantIDH1Epigenetics5-HydroxymethylcytosineBiologyEnhancerGeneDNA methylationWild typePhenotypeGliomaMolecular biologyCancer researchGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Gliomas demonstrate epigenetic dysregulation highlighted by the Glioma CpG-Island Methylator Phenotype (G-CIMP) seen in IDH1 mutant tumors. IDH1 mutation perturbs the balance between 5-methylcytosine (5mC) and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) by inhibiting TET-mediated active demethylation. The role 5hmC plays in IDH1 mutant tumors remains poorly understood. Methods: We profiled 5hmC in high grade IDH1 mutant (n = 12) and wild-type (n = 9) tumors on the Illumina MethylationEPIC Beadchip. We examined regions with high 5hmC abundance (top 1% probes), and differentially hydroxymethylated regions (DHMR). 5hmC profiles were correlated with gene expression. Results: Mean 5hmC b-values were 4.6%% and 3.8% for IDH1 mutant and wild-type tumors, respectively. Top 1% and DHMR probes demonstrated increased 5hmC among IDH1 mutants. 5hmC enriched for enhancer and super-enhancers. Among G-CIMP target genes, 22/50 were hydroxymethylated in our IDH1 mutant cohort, suggesting that 5hmC contributes to their overall methylation. Gene expression was associated with gene body 5hmC. 48 genes differentially expressed between IDH1 cohorts showed a positive Spearman correlation between 5hmC and gene expression, in particular for genes upregulated in IDH1 mutants. Conclusions: Locus-specific gain of 5hmC, targeting regulatory regions and associated with over-expressed genes, suggests a significant role for 5hmC in IDH1 mutant HGG.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation→French-language works237,207→