Introducing novel key genes and transcription factors associated with rectal cancer response to chemoradiation through co-expression network analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preoperative radiochemotherapy is a promising therapeutic method for locally advanced rectal cancer patients. However, the response of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients to preoperative radiotherapy varies widely. In this study, we aimed to identify novel biomarkers that could predict the response of colorectal tumors to treatment using a systems biology approach. We applied the Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis to construct co-expression networks and evaluated the correlation of these networks with radiation using the module-trait relationship. We then identified hub genes and related transcription factors in the selected co-expression module. Our analysis of seven constructed modules revealed that one module, which contained 113 nodes and 6066 edges, had the strongest correlation with radiation effects on CRC (correlation = 0.85; p-value = 6e-7). By analyzing the selected module with the CytoHubba plugin, we identified four hub genes, including ZEB2, JAM2, NDN, and PPAP2A. We also identified seven important transcription factors, including KLF4, SUZ12, TCF4, NANOG, POU5F1, SOX2, and SMARCA4, which may play essential roles in regulating the four hub genes. In summary, our findings suggest that ZEB2, JAM2, NDN, and PPAP2A, along with the seven transcription factors related to these hub genes, may be associated with the response of colorectal tumors to chemoradiotherapy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".