CircRNA-Based Cervical Cancer Prognosis Model, Immunological Validation and Drug Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer (CC) is a common cancer in female, which is associated with problems like poor prognosis. Circular RNA (circRNA) is a kind of competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) that has an important role in regulating microRNA (miRNA) in many cancers. The regulatory mechanisms of CC immune microenvironment and the transcriptome level remain to be fully explored. METHODS: In this study, we constructed the ceRNA network through the interaction data and expression matrix of circRNA, miRNA and mRNA. Meanwhile, based on the gene expression matrix, CIBERSORT algorithm was used to reveal contents of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs). Then, we screened prognostic markers based on ceRNA network and immune infiltration and constructed two nomograms. In order to find immunological differences between the high- and low-risk CC samples, we examined multiple immune checkpoints and predicted the effect of PD-L1 ICI immunotherapy. In addition, the sensitive therapeutics for high-risk patients were screened, and the potential agents with anti-CC activity were predicted by Connective Map (CMap). RESULTS: gene. The results of TIDE and single sample GSEA (ssGSEA) showed that T cells CD8 do play a key role in inhibiting tumor progression. Further, our study screened 24 drugs that were more sensitive to high-risk CC patients and several potential therapeutic agents for reference. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified several circRNA-miRNA-mRNA regulatory axes and six prognostic genes based on the ceRNA network. In addition, through TIIC, survival analysis and a series of immunological analyses, T cells were proved to be good prognostic markers, besides play an important role in the immune process. Finally, we screened 24 potentially more effective drugs and multiple potential drug compounds for high- and low-risk patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".