MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109467684 · doi:10.3390/cancers12123627

Detection of Structural Variants in Circulating Cell-Free DNA from Sarcoma Patients Using Next Generation Sequencing

2020· article· en· W3109467684 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lauren Mc Connell, Jana Gazdová, Katja Beck, Shambhavi Srivastava, Louise Harewood, Peter Stewart, Daniel Hübschmann, Albrecht Stenzinger, Hanno Glimm, Christoph E. Heilig, Stefan Fröhling, David González de Castro

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversitySarcoma UKDeutschen Konsortium für Translationale KrebsforschungQueen's University BelfastDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
KeywordsAlveolar soft part sarcomaSarcomaLiposarcomaMyxoid liposarcomaSynovial sarcomaSoft tissue sarcomaAlveolar rhabdomyosarcomaClear-cell sarcomaMedicinePathologyDNA sequencingCell-free fetal DNACancer researchDNABiologyRhabdomyosarcomaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analysis using next generation sequencing (NGS) is being implemented in clinical practice for treatment stratification and disease monitoring. However, using ctDNA to detect structural variants, a common occurrence in sarcoma, can be challenging. Here, we use a sarcoma-specific targeted NGS panel to identify translocations and copy number variants in a cohort of 12 tissue specimens and matched circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from soft tissue sarcoma patients, including alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 2), Ewing’s Sarcoma (n = 2), synovial sarcoma (n = 2), extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma (n = 1), clear cell sarcoma (n = 1), undifferentiated round cell sarcoma (n = 1), myxoid liposarcoma (n = 1), alveolar soft part cell sarcoma (n = 1) and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (n = 1). Structural variants were detected in 11/12 (91.6%) and 6/12 (50%) of tissue and plasma samples, respectively. Structural variants were detected in cfDNA at variant allele frequencies >0.2% with an average sequencing depth of 1026×. The results from this cohort show clinical potential for using NGS in ctDNA to aid in the diagnosis and clinical monitoring of sarcomas and warrant additional studies in larger cohorts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207