MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387164781 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adg1894

HAVOC: Small-scale histomic mapping of cancer biodiversity across large tissue distances using deep neural networks

2023· article· en· W4387164781 on OpenAlexaff
Anglin Dent, Kevin Faust, K. H. Brian Lam, Narges Alhangari, Alberto J. León, Queenie Tsang, Zaid Saeed Kamil, Andrew Gao, Prodipto Pal, Stéphanie Lheureux, Amit M. Oza, Phedias Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityProfiling (computer programming)Scale (ratio)Pipeline (software)Computer scienceGeneralizability theoryBenchmark (surveying)BiologyCartographyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intratumoral heterogeneity can wreak havoc on current precision medicine strategies because of challenges in sufficient sampling of geographically separated areas of biodiversity distributed across centimeter-scale tumor distances. To address this gap, we developed a deep learning pipeline that leverages histomorphologic fingerprints of tissue to create "Histomic Atlases of Variation Of Cancers" (HAVOC). Using a number of objective molecular readouts, we demonstrate that HAVOC can define regional cancer boundaries with distinct biology. Using larger tumor specimens, we show that HAVOC can map biodiversity even across multiple tissue sections. By guiding profiling of 19 partitions across six high-grade gliomas, HAVOC revealed that distinct differentiation states can often coexist and be regionally distributed within these tumors. Last, to highlight generalizability, we benchmark HAVOC on additional tumor types. Together, we establish HAVOC as a versatile tool to generate small-scale maps of tissue heterogeneity and guide regional deployment of molecular resources to relevant biodiverse niches.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207