MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165119324 · doi:10.1038/s41397-021-00237-5

Gene expression signatures predict response to therapy with growth hormone

2021· article· en· W3165119324 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Stevens, Philip Murray, Chiara De Leonibus, Terence Garner, Ekaterina Koledova, Geoffrey Ambler, Klaus Kapelari, Gerhard Binder, Mohamad Maghnie, Stefano Zucchini, Elena Bashnina, Julia Skorodok, Diego Yeste, Alicia Belgorosky, Juan-Pedro Lopez Siguero, R. Coutant, Eirik Vangsøy-Hansen, Lars Hagenäs, Jovanna Dahlgren, Cheri Deal, Pierre Chatelain, Peter Clayton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pharmacogenomics Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersMedical Research CouncilMerck KGaA
KeywordsTranscriptomePhenotypeGenePredictive valueGrowth hormone deficiencyGrowth hormoneInternal medicineGene expressionOncologyBiologyBioinformaticsComputational biologyMedicineHormoneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) is used as a therapeutic agent for disorders of growth including growth hormone deficiency (GHD) and Turner syndrome (TS). Treatment is costly and current methods to model response are inexact. GHD (n = 71) and TS patients (n = 43) were recruited to study response to r-hGH over 5 years. Analysis was performed using 1219 genetic markers and baseline (pre-treatment) blood transcriptome. Random forest was used to determine predictive value of transcriptomic data associated with growth response. No genetic marker passed the stringency criteria for prediction. However, we identified an identical set of genes in both GHD and TS whose expression could be used to classify therapeutic response to r-hGH with a high accuracy (AUC > 0.9). Combining transcriptomic markers with clinical phenotype was shown to significantly reduce predictive error. This work could be translated into a single genomic test linked to a prediction algorithm to improve clinical management. Trial registration numbers: NCT00256126 and NCT00699855.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Pharmacogenomics JournalSame topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth FactorsFrench-language works237,207