Identifying Tissue- and Cohort-Specific RNA Regulatory Modules in Cancer Cells Using Multitask Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MicroRNA (miRNA) alterations significantly impact the formation and progression of human cancers. miRNAs interact with messenger RNAs (mRNAs) to facilitate degradation or translational repression. Thus, identifying miRNA-mRNA regulatory modules in cohorts of primary tumor tissues are fundamental for understanding the biology of tumor heterogeneity and precise diagnosis and treatment. We established a multitask learning sparse regularized factor regression (MSRFR) method to determine key tissue- and cohort-specific miRNA-mRNA regulatory modules from expression profiles of tumors. MSRFR simultaneously models the sparse relationship between miRNAs and mRNAs and extracts tissue- and cohort-specific miRNA-mRNA regulatory modules separately. We tested the model's ability to determine cohort-specific regulatory modules of multiple cancer cohorts from the same tissue and their underlying tissue-specific regulatory modules by extracting similarities between cancer cohorts (i.e., blood, kidney, and lung). We also detected tissue-specific and cohort-specific signatures in the corresponding regulatory modules by comparing our findings from various other tissues. We show that MSRFR effectively determines cancer-related miRNAs in cohort-specific regulatory modules, distinguishes tissue- and cohort-specific regulatory modules from each other, and extracts tissue-specific information from different cohorts of disease-related tissue. Our findings indicate that the MSRFR model can support current efforts in precision medicine to define tumor-specific miRNA-mRNA signatures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".