MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386263853 · doi:10.21873/cgp.20394

Genome-wide Detection of Chimeric Transcripts in Early-stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

2023· article· en· W4386263853 on OpenAlexaff
Yaroslav Ilnytskyy, Lars F. Petersen, John B. McIntyre, Mie Konno, Adrijana D’Silva, Michelle L. Dean, A. Elegbede, Andrey Golubov, Olga Kovalchuk, Igor Kovalchuk, Gwyn Bebb

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Genomics & Proteomics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsROS1Fusion geneBiologyLung cancerCancerGeneStage (stratigraphy)Computational biologyCancer researchDiseaseOncologyMedicineAdenocarcinomaGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: Lung cancer remains the main culprit in cancer-related mortality worldwide. Transcript fusions play a critical role in the initiation and progression of multiple cancers. Treatment approaches based on specific targeting of discovered driver events, such as mutations in EGFR, and fusions in NTRK, ROS1, and ALK genes led to profound improvements in clinical outcomes. The formation of chimeric proteins due to genomic rearrangements or at the post-transcriptional level is widespread and plays a critical role in tumor initiation and progression. Yet, the fusion landscape of lung cancer remains underexplored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the JAFFA pipeline to discover transcript fusions in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The set of detected fusions was further analyzed to identify recurrent events, genes with multiple partners and fusions with high predicted oncogenic potential. Finally, we used a generalized linear model (GLM) to establish statistical associations between fusion occurrences and clinicopathological variables. RNA sequencing was used to discover and characterize transcript fusions in 270 NSCLC samples selected from the Glans-Look specimen repository. The samples were obtained during the early stages of disease prior to the initiation of chemo- or radiotherapy. RESULTS: We identified a set of 792 fusions where 751 were novel, and 33 were recurrent. Four of the 33 recurrent fusions were significantly associated with clinicopathological variables. Several of the fusion partners were represented by well-established oncogenes ERBB4, BRAF, FGFR2, and MET. CONCLUSION: The data presented in this study allow researchers to identify, select, and validate promising candidates for targeted clinical interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Genomics & ProteomicsSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207