The Telomere Length Landscape of Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Replicative immortality is a hallmark of cancer, and can be achieved through telomere lengthening and maintenance. We report telomere lengths (TLs) of 392 localized prostate cancer tumours and characterize their relationship to genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic features. Shorter tumour TLs were associated with elevated genomic instability, including single-nucleotide variants, indels and structural variants. Genes involved in cell proliferation and signaling were correlated with tumour TL at all levels of the central dogma. TL was also associated with multiple clinical features of a tumour. Longer TLs in non-tumour samples were associated with a lower rate of biochemical relapse after definitive local therapy. Our analysis integrates multi-omics data to illuminate the relationship of specific genomic alterations in a tumour and TL in prostate cancer. Although the role of telomere length in cancer has been well studied, its association to genomic features is less well known. We describe the multi-level integration of telomere length, genomics, transcriptomics and proteomics in localized prostate cancer. Patient Summary We examined the association between telomere length and multiple omics-level data in prostate cancer. We observed that traditional telomere mutations are rare in prostate cancer and that telomere length is associated with multiple measure of genomic instability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".