DNA methylation analysis improves the prognostication of acute myeloid leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Integration of orthogonal data could provide new opportunities to pinpoint the underlying molecular mechanisms of hematologic disorders. Using a novel gene network approach, we integrated DNA methylation data from The Cancer Genome Atlas ( n = 194 cases) with the corresponding gene expression profile. Our integrated gene network analysis classified AML patients into low‐, intermediate‐, and high‐risk groups. The identified high‐risk group had significantly shorter overall survival compared to the low‐risk group ( p ‐value ≤). Specifically, our approach identified a particular subgroup of nine high‐risk AML cases that died within 2 years after diagnosis. These high‐risk cases otherwise would be incorrectly classified as intermediate‐risk solely based on cytogenetics, mutation profiles, and common molecular characteristics of AML. We confirmed the prognostic value of our integrative gene network approach using two independent datasets, as well as through comparison with European LeukemiaNet and LSC17 criteria. Our approach could be useful in the prognostication of a subset of borderline AML cases. These cases would not be classified into appropriate risk groups by other approaches that use gene expression, but not DNA methylation data. Our findings highlight the significance of epigenomic data, and they indicate integrating DNA methylation data with gene coexpression networks can have a synergistic effect.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".