BIOM-59. NOVEL BIOMARKER DISCOVERY AND DIAGNOSTICS FOR INTRA-AXIAL BRAIN TUMORS, USING CSF PROTEOMICS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Invasive brain sampling is typically necessary for reliable diagnosis and prognostication of intra-axial brain tumors but carries risk of morbidity. Liquid biopsy of proximal fluids may mitigate this risk. Through direct contact with the tumor microenvironment and, as an ultra-filtrate of plasma, the cerebrospinal fluid may be the ideal matrix. Reflecting the tumor phenotype, proteomic analyses are critical. Here we identified diagnostic CSF proteomic signatures and putatively novel biomarkers for glioblastoma (GBM), brain metastases (BM), and central nervous system lymphoma (CNSL). METHODS CSF samples were retrospectively retrieved from the Penn State Neuroscience Biorepository and profiled using shotgun proteomics and the MStern approach. Proteomic signatures were identified using machine learning classifiers and survival analyses. RESULTS With as little as 30 µL of CSF, 755 unique proteins were recovered across 73 samples (22 GBM, 17 BM, 14 CNSL, 20 NPH). Proteomic-based classifiers identified malignancy with area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.94 and distinguished between tumor entities with AUROC ≥0.95. More clinically relevant triplex classifiers, comprised of just 3 proteins, distinguished between tumor entities with AUROC of 0.75-0.89. Novel biomarkers were identified, including GAP43, TFF3 and CACNA2D2, and characterized using single-cell RNA sequencing. DISCUSSION Reliable classification of intra-axial malignancies using low CSF volumes is feasible, allowing for longitudinal tumor surveillance. Based on emerging evidence, upfront implantation of CSF reservoirs in brain tumor patients warrants consideration.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".