Comprehensive analysis of lncRNAs reveals candidate prognostic biomarkers in multiple cancer types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are increasingly recognized as functional units in cancer pathways and powerful molecular biomarkers, however most lncRNAs remain uncharacterized. Here we performed a systematic discovery of prognostic lncRNAs in 9,326 patient tumors of 29 types using a proportional-hazards elastic net machine-learning framework. lncRNAs showed highly tissue-specific transcript abundance patterns. We identified 179 prognostic lncRNAs whose abundance correlated with patient risk and improved the performance of common clinical variables and molecular tumor subtypes. Pathway analysis revealed a large diversity of the high-risk tumors stratified by lncRNAs and suggested their functional associations. In lower-grade gliomas, discrete activation of HOXA10-AS indicated poor patient prognosis, neurodevelopmental pathway activation and a transcriptomic similarity to glioblastomas. HOXA10-AS knockdown in patient-derived glioblastoma cells caused decreased cell proliferation and deregulation of glioma driver genes and proliferation pathways. Our study underlines the pan-cancer potential of the non-coding transcriptome for developing molecular biomarkers and innovative therapeutic strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".