MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885865993 · doi:10.1038/s41375-018-0229-3

Genomic prediction of relapse in recipients of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

2018· article· en· W2885865993 on OpenAlexaff
Jarmo Ritari, Kati Hyvärinen, Satu Koskela, Maija Itälä‐Remes, Riitta Niittyvuopio, Anne Nihtinen, Urpu Salmenniemi, Matti Putkonen, Liisa Volin, Tony Kwan, Tomi Pastinen, Jukka Partanen

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilTekesAcademy of Finland
KeywordsTransplantationHuman leukocyte antigenOncologyBiologyHaematopoiesisPopulationExome sequencingStem cellInternal medicineImmunologyMedicineBioinformaticsGeneticsGeneAntigen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation currently represents the primary potentially curative treatment for cancers of the blood and bone marrow. While relapse occurs in approximately 30% of patients, few risk-modifying genetic variants have been identified. The present study evaluates the predictive potential of patient genetics on relapse risk in a genome-wide manner. We studied 151 graft recipients with HLA-matched sibling donors by sequencing the whole-exome, active immunoregulatory regions, and the full MHC region. To assess the predictive capability and contributions of SNPs and INDELs, we employed machine learning and a feature selection approach in a cross-validation framework to discover the most informative variants while controlling against overfitting. Our results show that germline genetic polymorphisms in patients entail a significant contribution to relapse risk, as judged by the predictive performance of the model (AUC = 0.72 [95% CI: 0.63-0.81]). Furthermore, the top contributing variants were predictive in two independent replication cohorts (n = 258 and n = 125) from the same population. The results can help elucidate relapse mechanisms and suggest novel therapeutic targets. A computational genomic model could provide a step toward individualized prognostic risk assessment, particularly when accompanied by other data modalities.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeukemiaSame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207