Molecular Characterization and Prognosis of Lactate-Related Genes in Lung Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the lactate-related genes (LRGs) in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) by various methods, construct a prognostic model, and explore the relationship between lactate subtypes and the immune tumor microenvironment (TME). METHODS: 24 LRGs were collected. The mutation landscape and the prognosis value of LRGs were explored by using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data. Consensus clustering analysis was used for different lactate subtype identification. Based on the lactate subtypes, we explore the landscape of TME cell infiltration. A risk-score was calculated by using the LASSO-Cox analysis. A quantitative real-time PCR assay was utilized to validate the expression of characteristic genes in clinical cancer tissues and paracarinoma tissues from LUAD patients. RESULTS: Comparing the normal samples, 18 LRGs were differentially expressed in tumor samples, which revealed that the differential expression of LRGs may be related to Copy Number Variation (CNV) alterations. The two distinct lactate subtypes were defined. Compared to patients in the LRGcluster A group, LUAD patients in the LRGcluster B group achieved better survival. The prognostic model was constructed based on differentially expressed genes (DEGs) via the LASSO-Cox analysis, which showed the accuracy of predicting the prognosis of LUAD patients using the ROC curve. A high-risk score was related to a high immune score, stromal score, and tumor mutation burden (TMB). Patients had better OS with low risk compared with those with high risk. The sensitivities of different risk groups to chemotherapeutic drugs were explored. Finally, the expression of characteristic genes in clinical cancer tissues and paracarinoma tissues from LUAD patients was verified via qRT-PCR. CONCLUSIONS: The lactate subtypes were independent prognostic biomarkers in LUAD. Additionally, the difference in the lactate subtypes was an indispensable feature for the individual TME. The comprehensive evaluation of the lactate subtypes in the single tumor would help us to understand the infiltration characteristics of TME and guide immunotherapy strategies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".