MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901319730 · doi:10.1186/s12920-018-0413-3

Genomic analyses based on pulmonary adenocarcinoma in situ reveal early lung cancer signature

2018· article· en· W2901319730 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dan Li, William Yang, Yifan Zhang, Jack Yang, Renchu Guan, Dong Xu, Mary Qu Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Genomics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFerroptosis and cancer prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationHamilton Health Sciences FoundationArkansas Science and Technology Authority
KeywordsLung cancerAdenocarcinomaBiologyCancerAngiogenesisStage (stratigraphy)GeneOncologyBioinformaticsPathologyCancer researchMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents more than about 80% of the lung cancer. The early stages of NSCLC can be treated with complete resection with a good prognosis. However, most cases are detected at late stage of the disease. The average survival rate of the patients with invasive lung cancer is only about 4%. Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) is an intermediate subtype of lung adenocarcinoma that exhibits early stage growth patterns but can develop into invasion. METHODS: In this study, we used RNA-seq data from normal, AIS, and invasive lung cancer tissues to identify a gene module that represents the distinguishing characteristics of AIS as AIS-specific genes. Two differential expression analysis algorithms were employed to identify the AIS-specific genes. Then, the subset of the best performed AIS-specific genes for the early lung cancer prediction were selected by random forest. Finally, the performances of the early lung cancer prediction were assessed using random forest, support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) on four independent early lung cancer datasets including one tumor-educated blood platelets (TEPs) dataset. RESULTS: Based on the differential expression analysis, 107 AIS-specific genes that consisted of 93 protein-coding genes and 14 long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) were identified. The significant functions associated with these genes include angiogenesis and ECM-receptor interaction, which are highly related to cancer development and contribute to the smoking-free lung cancers. Moreover, 12 of the AIS-specific lncRNAs are involved in lung cancer progression by potentially regulating the ECM-receptor interaction pathway. The feature selection by random forest identified 20 of the AIS-specific genes as early stage lung cancer signatures using the dataset obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) lung adenocarcinoma samples. Of the 20 signatures, two were lncRNAs, BLACAT1 and CTD-2527I21.15 which have been reported to be associated with bladder cancer, colorectal cancer and breast cancer. In blind classification for three independent tissue sample datasets, these signature genes consistently yielded about 98% accuracy for distinguishing early stage lung cancer from normal cases. However, the prediction accuracy for the blood platelets samples was only 64.35% (sensitivity 78.1%, specificity 50.59%, and AUROC 0.747). CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of AIS with normal and invasive tumor revealed diseases-specific genes and offered new insights into the mechanism underlying AIS progression into an invasive tumor. These genes can also serve as the signatures for early diagnosis of lung cancer with high accuracy. The expression profile of gene signatures identified from tissue cancer samples yielded remarkable early cancer prediction for tissues samples, however, relatively lower accuracy for boold platelets samples.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical GenomicsSame topicFerroptosis and cancer prognosisFrench-language works237,207