Potential role of metabolomics in diagnosis and surveillance of gastric cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gastric cancer is one of the deadliest cancers worldwide, and is especially prevalent in Asian countries. With such high morbidity and mortality, early diagnosis is essential to achieving curative intent treatment and long term survival. Metabolomics is a new field of study that analyzes metabolites from biofluids and tissue samples. While metabolomics is still in its infancy, there are numerous potential applications in oncology, specifically early diagnosis. Only a few studies in the literature have examined metabolomics' role in gastric cancer. Various fatty acid, carbohydrate, nucleic acid, and amino acid metabolites have been identified that distinguish gastric cancer from normal tissue and benign gastric disease. However, findings from these few studies are at times conflicting. Most studies demonstrate some relationship of cancer cells to the Warburg Effect, in that glycolysis predominates with conversion of pyruvate to lactate. This is one of the most consistent findings across the literature. There is less consistency in metabolomic signature with respect to nucleic acids, lipids and amino acids. In spite of this, metabolomics holds some promise for cancer surveillance but further studies are necessary to achieve consistency and validation before it can be widely employed as a clinical tool.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".