Epithelial Membrane Protein-3 and Chitinase-3-like Protein-1 as New Prognostic Predictors of Glioma, a Two-Gene Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma multiforme is the most common primary intracranial tumor, with a high degree of malignancy, poor therapeutic effect, and poor prognosis. According to previous studies, CHI3L1 and EMP3 are two independent tumor predictors that are of great significance for the prognostic prediction of other tumors, and their expression levels may be related to the prognosis of glioma patients. METHODS: using Oncomine, Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA), the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas (CGGA), cBioPortal, LinkedOmics, and other databases, 693 glioma patients were screened to analyze the relationship between EMP3 and CHI3L1 expression and prognosis in glioma patients. RESULTS: low-grade glioma patients with a low expression of EMP3/CHI3L1 had a better prognosis, and the combination of EMP3/CHI3L1 is a new predictor for glioma patients. CONCLUSION: We used the TCGA and CGGA databases to analyze the effect of EMP3 and CHI3L1 expression on the prognosis of glioma patients and their correlation with gene expression using bioinformation analysis. The results showed that low-grade glioma patients with a low expression of EMP3 and CHI3L1 had a better prognosis, and EMP3 and CHI3L1 co-expression genes were correlated. The combination of these two factors could be a new prognostic index for glioma patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".