PPARG, GNG12, and CD19 are potential independent predictors of central nerve recurrence in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To identify biomarkers that can predict the recurrence of the central nervous system (CNS) in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).Materials and Methods The transcriptome and clinical data of ALL in children were downloaded from the TARGET database. Transcriptome data were analyzed by bioinformatics method to identify core (hub) genes and establish a risk assessment model. Univariate Cox analysis was performed on each clinical data, and multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed on the obtained results and risk score. The children ALL phase I samples from TARGET database were used for validation.Results Univariate multivariate Cox analysis of 10 hub genes identified showed that PPARG (HR = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.67–0.91, p = 0.007), CD19 (HR = 1.15, 95%CI = 1.05–1.26, p = 0.003) and GNG12 (HR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.04–1.51, p = 0.017) had statistical differences. The risk score was statistically significant in univariate (HR = 3.06, 95%CI = 1.30–7.19, p = 0.011) and multivariate (HR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.16–2.32, p = 0.046) Cox regression analysis. The survival analysis results of the high and low-risk groups were different when the validation dataset was substituted into the model (p = 0.018). Then, we constructed a Nomogram which had a concordance index of survival prediction of 0.791(95%CI= 0.779-0.803). In addition, the CNS involvement grading status at first diagnosis CNS3 vs. CNS1 (HR = 5.74, 95%CI = 2.01–16.4, p = 0.001), T cell vs B cell (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.06-2.49, p = 0.026) were also statistically significant.Conclusions PPARG, GNG12, and CD19 may be predictors of CNS relapse in childhood ALL.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".