A Six-Gene Prognostic Risk Prediction Model In Hepatitis B Virus-Associated Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to screen hepatitis B virus (HBV)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-related feature ribonucleic acids (RNAs) and to establish a prognostic model. Methods: The transcriptome expression data of HBV-associated HCC were downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and Gene Expression Omnibus database. Differential RNAs between HBV-associated HCC and normal controls were identified by a meta-analysis of TCGA, GSE55092 and GSE121248. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis was performed to identify key RNAs and modules. A prognostic score model was established using TCGA as a training set by Cox regression analysis and was validated in E-TABM-36 dataset. Additionally, independent prognostic clinical factors were screened, and the function of lncRNAs was predicted through Gene Set Enrichment Analysis. Results: A total of 710 consistent differential RNAs between HBV-associated HCC and normal controls were obtained, including five lncRNAs and 705 mRNAs. An optimized combination of six differential RNAs (DSCR4, DBH, ECM1, GDAP1, MATR3 and RFC4) was selected and a prognostic score model was constructed. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the prognosis of the high-risk and low-risk groups separated by this model was significantly different in the training set and the validation set. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis showed that the co-expression genes of DSCR4 were significantly correlated with neuroactive ligand receptor interaction pathway. Conclusion: A prognostic model based on DSCR4, DBH, ECM1, GDAP1, MATR3 and RFC4 was developed that can accurately predict the prognosis of patients with HBV-associated HCC. These genes, as well as histologic grade, may serve as independent prognostic factors in HBV-associated HCC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".