Pan-cancer analysis of non-coding transcripts reveals the prognostic onco-lncRNA HOXA10-AS in gliomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are increasingly recognized as functional units in cancer and powerful biomarkers; however, most remain uncharacterized. Here, we analyze 5,592 prognostic lncRNAs in 9,446 cancers of 30 types using machine learning. We identify 166 lncRNAs whose expression correlates with survival and improves the accuracy of common clinical variables, molecular features, and cancer subtypes. Prognostic lncRNAs are often characterized by switch-like expression patterns. In low-grade gliomas, HOXA10-AS activation is a robust marker of poor prognosis that complements IDH1/2 mutations, as validated in another retrospective cohort, and correlates with developmental pathways in tumor transcriptomes. Loss- and gain-of-function studies in patient-derived glioma cells, organoids, and xenograft models identify HOXA10-AS as a potent onco-lncRNA that regulates cell proliferation, contact inhibition, invasion, Hippo signaling, and mitotic and neuro-developmental pathways. Our study underscores the pan-cancer potential of the non-coding transcriptome for identifying biomarkers and regulators of cancer progression.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".