Cross-platform transcriptomic profiling of the response to recombinant human erythropoietin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract RNA-seq has matured and become an important tool for studying RNA biology. Here we compared two RNA-seq (Illumina sequencing by synthesis and MGI DNBSEQ™) and two microarray platforms (Illumina Expression BeadChip and GeneChip™ Human Transcriptome Array 2.0) in healthy individuals administered recombinant human erythropoietin for transcriptome-wide quantification of differential gene expression. The results show that total RNA sequencing combined with DNB-seq produced a multitude of genes of biological relevance and significance in response to recombinant human erythropoietin, in contrast to other platforms. Through data triangulation linking genes to functions, genes representing the processes of erythropoiesis as well as non-erythropoietic functions of erythropoietin were unveiled. This study provides a knowledge base of genes characterising the responses to recombinant human erythropoietin through cross-platform comparison and 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".