Multi-omics characterization of autophagy-related molecular features for therapeutic targeting of autophagy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autophagy is a major contributor to anti-cancer therapy resistance. Many efforts have been made to understand and overcome autophagy-mediated therapy resistance, but these efforts have been unsuccessful in clinical applications. In this study, we establish an autophagy signature to estimate tumor autophagy status. We then classify approximately 10,000 tumor samples across 33 cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas into autophagy score-high and autophagy score-low groups. We characterize the associations between multi-dimensional molecular features and tumor autophagy, and further analyse the effects of autophagy status on drug response. In contrast to the conventional view that the induction of autophagy serves as a key resistance mechanism during cancer therapy, our analysis reveals that autophagy induction may also sensitize cancer cells to anti-cancer drugs. We further experimentally validate this phenomenon for several anti-cancer drugs in vitro and in vivo, and reveal that autophagy inducers potentially sensitizes tumor cells to etoposide through downregulating the expression level of DDIT4. Our study provides a comprehensive landscape of molecular alterations associated with tumor autophagy and highlights an opportunity to leverage multi-omics analysis to utilize multiple drug sensitivity induced by autophagy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".