MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948592660 · doi:10.1177/0962280219852721

Investigating protein patterns in human leukemia cell line experiments: A Bayesian approach for extremely small sample sizes

2019· article· en· W2948592660 on OpenAlexaff
Thierry Chekouo, Francesco C. Stingo, Caleb A. Class, Yuanqing Yan, Zachary S. Bohannan, Yue Wei, Guillermo Garcia‐Manero, Samir Hanash, Kim‐Anh Do

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Methods in Medical Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Cancer InstituteUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterNational Institutes of HealthCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas
KeywordsMyeloid leukemiaBayesian probabilityComputational biologySample size determinationLeukemiaComputer scienceCancer cell linesMass cytometrySample (material)BioinformaticsBiologyCancerStatisticsChemistryMathematicsCancer researchCancer cellPhenotypeChromatographyArtificial intelligenceGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human cancer cell line experiments are valuable for investigating drug sensitivity biomarkers. The number of biomarkers measured in these experiments is typically on the order of several thousand, whereas the number of samples is often limited to one or at most three replicates for each experimental condition. We have developed an innovative Bayesian approach that efficiently identifies clusters of proteins that exhibit similar patterns of expression. Motivated by the availability of ion mobility mass spectrometry data on cell line experiments in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia, our methodology can identify proteins that follow biologically meaningful trends of expression. Extensive simulation studies demonstrate good performance of the proposed method even in the presence of relatively small effects and sample sizes.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Methods in Medical ResearchSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207