Identification of five important genes to predict glioblastoma subtypes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common and aggressive primary brain tumour in adults, has been classified into three subtypes: classical, mesenchymal, and proneural. While the original classification relied on an 840 gene-set, further clarification on true GBM subtypes uses a 150-gene signature to accurately classify GBM into the three subtypes. We hypothesized whether a machine learning approach could be used to identify a smaller gene-set to accurately predict GBM subtype. METHODS: Using a supervised machine learning approach, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), we developed a classifier to predict the three subtypes of glioblastoma (GBM): classical, mesenchymal, and proneural. We tested the classifier on in-house GBM tissue, cell lines, and xenograft samples to predict their subtype. RESULTS: We identified the five most important genes for characterizing the three subtypes based on genes that often exhibited high Importance Scores in our XGBoost analyses. On average, this approach achieved 80.12% accuracy in predicting these three subtypes of GBM. Furthermore, we applied our five-gene classifier to successfully predict the subtype of GBM samples at our centre. CONCLUSION: Our 5-gene set classifier is the smallest classifier to date that can predict GBM subtypes with high accuracy, which could facilitate the future development of a five-gene subtype diagnostic biomarker for routine assays in GBM samples.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it