MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3004493480 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-58804-y

Identification of gene signature for treatment response to guide precision oncology in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

2020· article· en· W3004493480 on OpenAlexaff
Ninadh M. D’Costa, Davide Cina, Raunak Shrestha, Robert H. Bell, Yen‐Yi Lin, Hossein Asghari, César U. Monjarás-Ávila, Christian Kollmannsberger, Faraz Hach, Claudia Chávez‐Muñoz, Alan So

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalBC Cancer AgencySimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClear cell renal cell carcinomaMedicineGene signatureOncologyRenal cell carcinomaStromal cellInternal medicineDiseaseImmune systemBioinformaticsGene expressionGeneImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is a common therapy resistant disease with aberrant angiogenic and immunosuppressive features. Patients with metastatic disease are treated with targeted therapies based on clinical features: low-risk patients are usually treated with anti-angiogenic drugs and intermediate/high-risk patients with immune therapy. However, there are no biomarkers available to guide treatment choice for these patients. A recently published phase II clinical trial observed a correlation between ccRCC patients' clustering and their response to targeted therapy. However, the clustering of these groups was not distinct. Here, we analyzed the gene expression profile of 469 ccRCC patients, using featured selection technique, and have developed a refined 66-gene signature for improved sub-classification of patients. Moreover, we have identified a novel comprehensive expression profile to distinguish between migratory stromal and immune cells. Furthermore, the proposed 66-gene signature was validated using a different cohort of 64 ccRCC patients. These findings are foundational for the development of reliable biomarkers that may guide treatment decision-making and improve therapy response in ccRCC patients.

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)0.001
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→