MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210660331 · doi:10.3410/f.739341152.793585340

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Pathway-based classification of glioblastoma uncovers a mitochondrial subtype with therapeutic vulnerabilities.

2021· dataset· en· W4210660331 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Angers, Graham MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxidative phosphorylationCancer researchGlycolysisMitochondrionAnaerobic glycolysisCancerBiologyMedicineInternal medicineMetabolismGeneticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transcriptomic classification of glioblastoma (GBM) has failed to predict survival and therapeutic vulnerabilities. A computational approach for unbiased identification of core biological traits of single cells and bulk tumors uncovered four tumor cell states and GBM subtypes distributed along neurodevelopmental and metabolic axes, classified as proliferative/progenitor, neuronal, mitochondrial and glycolytic/plurimetabolic. Each subtype was enriched with biologically coherent multiomic features. Mitochondrial GBM was associated with the most favorable clinical outcome. It relied exclusively on oxidative phosphorylation for energy production, whereas the glycolytic/plurimetabolic subtype was sustained by aerobic glycolysis and amino acid and lipid metabolism. Deletion of the glucose-proton symporter SLC45A1 was the truncal alteration most significantly associated with mitochondrial GBM, and the reintroduction of SLC45A1 in mitochondrial glioma cells induced acidification and loss of fitness. Mitochondrial, but not glycolytic/plurimetabolic, GBM exhibited marked vulnerability to inhibitors of oxidative phosphorylation. The pathway-based classification of GBM informs survival and enables precision targeting of cancer metabolism. PMID: 33681822 Funding information This work was supported by: NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA239721 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA178546 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA131126 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA179044 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: U54 CA193313 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA101644 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA190891 NINDS NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 NS103473 NCI NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 CA239698 More Less keyboard_arrow_down

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6800.383

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→