MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112706733 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaa222.031

ATRT-33. ENABLING RAPID CLASSIFICATION OF ATRT WITH NANOSTRING NCOUNTER PLATFORM

2020· article· en· W3112706733 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Ho, Anthony Arnoldo, Yunan Zhong, Mei Lu, Jonathon Torchia, Fupan Yao, Cynthia Hawkins, Annie Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubtypingDNA methylationTranscriptomeEpigeneticsComputational biologyWorkflowGene expressionGeneBioinformaticsBiologyComputer scienceDatabaseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, using gene expression and methylation array platform, multiple research groups have reported the presence of at least three major Atypical Teratoid Rhabdoid Tumor (ATRT) subtypes that exhibit distinct epigenetic, transcriptomic and clinical features. Yet, utilizing ATRT subtypes in a clinical setting remains challenging due to a lack of suitable biological markers, limited sample quantities and relatively high cost of current assays. To address this gap between research and clinical practice, we have designed an assay that utilizes a custom 35 signature genes panel for the NanoString nCounter System and have created a flexible machine learning classifier package for ATRT tumour subtyping. We have analyzed 71 ATRT primary tumours with matching gene expression data using the 35 genes panel. 60% of the data was used for models training (10 repeats of 10-fold cross validation with subgroup balanced sample splitting) resulting in overall 94.6% training accuracy. The remaining 40% of the samples were used for model validation and the assay was able to achieve 92–100% accuracy with no subgroup bias. To demonstrate the flexibility of the workflow, we have tested it against other transcriptome-based methods such as gene expression array and RNASeq. We have also demonstrated its use in samples that were not classifiable by methylation-based method. We are presenting here a rapid and accurate ATRT subtyping assay for clinical usage that is compatible with archived ATRT tissues.

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 score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207