Evaluation of DNA Methylation Array for Glioma Tumor Profiling and Description of a Novel Epi-Signature to Distinguish IDH1/IDH2 Mutant and Wild-Type Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular biomarkers, such as IDH1/IDH2 mutations and 1p19q co-deletion, are included in the histopathological and clinical criteria currently used to diagnose and classify gliomas. IDH1/IDH2 mutation is a common feature of gliomas and is associated with a glioma-CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP). Aberrant genomic methylation patterns can also be used to extrapolate information about copy number variation in a tumor. This project’s goal was to assess the feasibility of DNA methylation array for the simultaneous detection of glioma biomarkers as a more effective testing strategy compared to existing single analyte tests. Methods: Whole-genome methylation array (WGMA) testing was performed using 48 glioma DNA samples to detect methylation aberrations and chromosomal gains and losses. The analyzed samples include 39 tumors in the discovery cohort and 9 tumors in the replication cohort. Methylation profiles for each sample were correlated with IDH1 p.R132G mutation, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and previous 1p19q clinical testing to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the WGMA assay for the detection of these variants. Results: We developed a DNA methylation signature to specifically distinguish a IDH1/IDH2 mutant tumor from normal samples. This signature is composed of 11 CpG sites that were significantly hypermethylated in the IDH1/IDH2 mutant group. Copy number analysis using WGMA data was able to identify five of five positive samples for 1p19q co-deletion and was concordant for all negative samples. Conclusions: The DNA methylation signature presented here has the potential to refine the utility of WGMA to predict IDH1/IDH2 mutation status of gliomas, thus improving diagnostic yield and efficiency of laboratory testing compared to single analyte IDH1/IDH2 or 1p19q tests.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".