Transcriptome analysis reveals high tumor heterogeneity with respect to re-activation of stemness and proliferation programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant alterations in signaling pathways and transcriptional regulatory programs together represent major hallmarks of many cancers. These, among all, include the reactivation of stemness, which is registered by the expression of pathways that are active in the embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Here, we assembled gene sets that reflect the stemness and proliferation signatures and used them to analyze a large panel of RNA-seq data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Consortium in order to specifically assess the expression of stemness-related and proliferation-related genes across a collection of different tumor types. We introduced a metric that captures the collective similarity of the expression profile of a tumor to that of ESCs, which showed that stemness and proliferation signatures vary greatly between different tumor types. We also observed a high degree of intertumoral heterogeneity in the expression of stemness- and proliferation-related genes, which was associated with increased hazard ratios in a fraction of tumors and mirrored by high intratumoral heterogeneity across cancer cells in single cell RNA-seq datasets. Taken together, these results indicate that the expression of stemness signatures is highly heterogeneous and cannot be used as a universal determinant of cancer. This calls into question the universal validity of diagnostic tests that are based on stem cell markers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".