BRCA1 Variant Assessment Using a Simple Analytic Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We previously developed a biological assay to accurately predict BRCA1 (BRCA1 DNA repair associated) mutation status, based on gene expression profiles of Epstein-Barr virus-transformed lymphoblastoid cell lines. The original work was done using whole genome expression microarrays, and nearest shrunken centroids analysis. While these approaches are appropriate for model building, they are difficult to implement clinically, where more targeted testing and analysis are required for time and cost savings. METHODS: Here, we describe adaptation of the original predictor to use the NanoString nCounter platform for testing, with analysis based on the k-top scoring pairs (k-TSP) method. RESULTS: Assessing gene expression using the nCounter platform on a set of lymphoblastoid cell lines yielded 93.8% agreement with the microarray-derived data, and 87.5% overall correct classification of BRCA1 carriers and controls. Using the original gene expression microarray data used to develop our predictor with nearest shrunken centroids, we rebuilt a classifier based on the k-TSP method. This classifier relies on the relative expression of 10 pairs of genes, compared to the original 43 identified by nearest shrunken centroids (NSC), and was 96.2% concordant with the original training set prediction, with a 94.3% overall correct classification of BRCA1 carriers and controls. CONCLUSIONS: The k-TSP classifier was shown to accurately predict BRCA1 status using data generated on the nCounter platform and is feasible for initiating a clinical validation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".