Single-cell sequencing in ovarian cancer: a new frontier in precision medicine
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article discusses the advances, applications and challenges of using single-cell RNA sequencing data in guiding treatment decisions for ovarian cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Genetic heterogeneity is a hallmark of ovarian cancer biology and underlies treatment resistance. Defining the different cell types present within a single ovarian cancer is difficult, but could ultimately lead to improvements in diagnosis and treatment. Next-generation sequencing technologies have rapidly increased our understanding of the molecular landscape of epithelial ovarian cancers, but the majority of these studies are conducted on bulk samples, resulting in data that represents an 'average' of all cells present. Single-cell sequencing provides a means to characterize heterogeneity with a tumor tissue in ovarian cancer patients and opens up opportunity to determine key molecular properties that influence clinical outcomes, including prognosis and treatment response. SUMMARY: Single-cell sequencing provides a powerful tool in improving our understanding of tumor cell heterogeneity for the purpose of informing personalized cancer treatment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it