MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

GD2 and GD3 gangliosides as diagnostic biomarkers for all stages and subtypes of ovarian cancer.

2023· article· en· W4379281497 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Jeter, Alba Galán, Arturo Papaluca, Ali Nejatie, Emad Matanes, Fouad Brahimi, Amber Yasmeen, Eurı́dice Carmona, Kathleen Klein, Sonja Billes, Ahmed E. Dawod, Prasad Gawande, Anne‐Marie Mes‐Masson, Celia M.T. Greenwood, Walter H. Gotlieb, H. Uri Saragovi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOvarian cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerCohortInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyBiomarkerImmunohistochemistryPathologyOncologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e17604 Background: Ovarian cancer (OC) is the deadliest gynecological cancer, often diagnosed at advanced stages. A fast and accurate diagnostic method for early-stage OC is needed. The tumor marker gangliosides, GD2 and GD3, exhibit properties that make them ideal potential diagnostic biomarkers but they have never before been quantified in OC. We investigated the diagnostic utility GD2 and GD3 for diagnosis of all subtypes and stages of OC. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated GD2 and GD3 expression in biobanked tissue and serum samples from patients with invasive epithelial OC, healthy donors, non-malignant gynecological conditions, and other cancers. GD2 and GD3 levels were evaluated in tissue samples by immunohistochemistry (n=299), and in two cohorts of serum samples by quantitative ELISA. A Discovery Cohort (n=379) showed feasibility of GD2 and GD3 quantitative ELISA for diagnosing OC, and a subsequent Model Cohort (n=200) was used to train and cross-validate a diagnostic model. Results: GD2 and GD3 were expressed in tissues of all OC subtypes and FIGO stages but not in surrounding healthy tissue or other controls. In serum, GD2 and GD3 were elevated in patients with OC. A novel diagnostic model that included serum levels of GD2 and GD3 was superior to the standard of care (CA125, p<0.001) at detecting OC, as well as, in early-stage (I/II) OC samples. Conclusions: GD2 and GD3 are high value candidates for building a novel diagnostic panel. A diagnostic model combining GD2 and GD3 quantification in serum had diagnostic power for all subtypes and all stages of OC, including early-stage. Further research exploring the utility GD2 and GD3 for diagnosis of OC is warranted. Future work will aim to validate these biomarkers in independent prospective studies. [Table: see text]

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research→French-language works237,207→