Identification of Autophagy‐Related Prognostic Signature and Analysis of Immune Cell Infiltration in Low‐Grade Gliomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autophagy plays an important role in cancer. Many studies have demonstrated that autophagy‐related genes (ARGs) can act as a prognostic signature for some cancers, but little has been known in low‐grade gliomas (LGG). In our study, we aimed to establish a prognostical model based on ARGs and find prognostic risk‐related key genes in LGG. In the present study, a prognostic signature was constructed based on a total of 8 ARGs (MAPK8IP1, EEF2, GRID2, BIRC5, DLC1, NAMPT, GRID1, and TP73). It was revealed that the higher the risk score, the worse was the prognosis. Time‐dependent ROC analysis showed that the risk score could precisely predict the prognosis of LGG patients. Additionally, four key genes (TGFβ2, SERPING1, SERPINE1, and TIMP1) were identified and found significantly associated with OS of LGG patients. Besides, they were also discovered to be strongly related to six types of immune cells which infiltrated in LGG tumor. Taken together, the present study demonstrated the promising potential of the ARG risk score formula as an independent factor for LGG prediction. It also provided the autophagy‐related signature of prognosis and potential therapeutic targets for the treatment of LGG.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".