MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303415615 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-33544-x

Integrated analysis of cervical squamous cell carcinoma cohorts from three continents reveals conserved subtypes of prognostic significance

2022· article· en· W4303415615 on OpenAlexaff
Ankur Chakravarthy, Ian Reddin, Stephen Henderson, Cindy Dong, Nerissa K. Kirkwood, Maxmilan Jeyakumar, Daniela Rothschild-Rodriguez, Natalia Gonzalez-Martinez, Jacqueline McDermott, Xiaoping Su, Nagayasau Egawa, Christina S. Fjeldbo, Vilde E. Skingen, Heidi Lyng, Mari K. Halle, Camilla Krakstad, Afschin Soleiman, Susanne Sprung, Matt Lechner, Peter J. I. Ellis, Mark N. Wass, Martin Michaelis, Heidi Fiegl, Helga B. Salvesen, Gareth J. Thomas, John Doorbar, Kerry Chester, Andrew Feber, Tim R. Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustUniversity of KentBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilRosetrees TrustCancer Research UKProstate Cancer UKResearch Councils UKMedical Research CouncilRoyal SocietyPancreatic Cancer UK
KeywordsBasal cellCervical carcinomaBiologyOncologyCancer researchMedicinePathologyCervical cancerGeneticsCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Here we present an integrated multi-omic analysis of 643 cervical squamous cell carcinomas (CSCC, the most common histological variant of cervical cancer), representing patient populations from the USA, Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa and identify two CSCC subtypes (C1 and C2) with differing prognosis. C1 and C2 tumours can be driven by either of the two most common HPV types in cervical cancer (16 and 18) and while HPV16 and HPV18 are overrepresented among C1 and C2 tumours respectively, the prognostic difference between groups is not due to HPV type. C2 tumours, which comprise approximately 20% of CSCCs across these cohorts, display distinct genomic alterations, including loss or mutation of the STK11 tumour suppressor gene, increased expression of several immune checkpoint genes and differences in the tumour immune microenvironment that may explain the shorter survival associated with this group. In conclusion, we identify two therapy-relevant CSCC subtypes that share the same defining characteristics across three geographically diverse cohorts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207