Accurate and efficient detection of gene fusions from RNA sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of gene fusions from RNA sequencing data is a routine task in cancer research and precision oncology. However, despite the availability of many computational tools, fusion detection remains challenging. Existing methods suffer from poor prediction accuracy and are computationally demanding. We developed Arriba, a novel fusion detection algorithm with high sensitivity and short runtime. When applied to a large collection of published pancreatic cancer samples ( n = 803), Arriba identified a variety of driver fusions, many of which affected druggable proteins, including ALK, BRAF, FGFR2, NRG1, NTRK1, NTRK3, RET, and ROS1. The fusions were significantly associated with KRAS wild-type tumors and involved proteins stimulating the MAPK signaling pathway, suggesting that they substitute for activating mutations in KRAS . In addition, we confirmed the transforming potential of two novel fusions, RRBP1 - RAF1 and RASGRP1 - ATP1A1 , in cellular assays. These results show Arriba's utility in both basic cancer research and clinical translation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".