MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4310941456 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2115328119

Noninvasive detection of any-stage cancer using free glycosaminoglycans

2022· article· en· W4310941456 on OpenAlexaff
Siniša Bratulić, Angelo Limeta, Saeed Dabestani, Helgi Birgisson, Gunilla Enblad, Karin Stålberg, Göran Hesselager, Michael Häggman, Martin Höglund, Oscar E. Simonson, Peter Stålberg, Henrik Lindman, Anna Bång-Rudenstam, Matias Ekstrand, Gunjan Kumar, Ilaria T. Cavarretta, Massimo Alfano, Francesco Pellegrino, Thomas Mandel-Clausen, Ali Salanti, Francesca Maccari, Fabio Galeotti, Nicola Volpi, Mads Daugaard, Mattias Belting, Sven Lundstam, Ulrika Stierner, Jan Nyman, Bengt Bergman, Per‐Henrik Edqvist, Max Levin, Andrea Salonia, Henrik Kjölhede, Eric Jonasch, Jens Nielsen, Francesco Gatto

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSahlgrenska AkademinUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterUppsala UniversitetFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western AustraliaLunds UniversitetUniversity of California, San DiegoKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseGöteborgs UniversitetKarolinska InstitutetIngaBritt och Arne Lundbergs ForskningsstiftelseSahlgrenska UniversitetssjukhusetDet Sundhedsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns UniversitetAkademiska SjukhusetUniversità Degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emila
KeywordsGlycosaminoglycanStage (stratigraphy)CancerCancer detectionMedicineBiologyInternal medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer mortality is exacerbated by late-stage diagnosis. Liquid biopsies based on genomic biomarkers can noninvasively diagnose cancers. However, validation studies have reported ~10% sensitivity to detect stage I cancer in a screening population and specific types, such as brain or genitourinary tumors, remain undetectable. We investigated urine and plasma free glycosaminoglycan profiles (GAGomes) as tumor metabolism biomarkers for multi-cancer early detection (MCED) of 14 cancer types using 2,064 samples from 1,260 cancer or healthy subjects. We observed widespread cancer-specific changes in biofluidic GAGomes recapitulated in an in vivo cancer progression model. We developed three machine learning models based on urine ( N urine = 220 cancer vs. 360 healthy) and plasma ( N plasma = 517 vs. 425) GAGomes that can detect any cancer with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83–0.93 with up to 62% sensitivity to stage I disease at 95% specificity. Undetected patients had a 39 to 50% lower risk of death. GAGomes predicted the putative cancer location with 89% accuracy. In a validation study on a screening-like population requiring ≥ 99% specificity, combined GAGomes predicted any cancer type with poor prognosis within 18 months with 43% sensitivity (21% in stage I; N = 121 and 49 cases). Overall, GAGomes appeared to be powerful MCED metabolic biomarkers, potentially doubling the number of stage I cancers detectable using genomic biomarkers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences→Same topicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism→French-language works237,207→