Integrated RNA-sequencing and network analysis approach to identify the Hub genes and vital pathways associated with gastric cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Gastric cancer is one of the most prevalent types of cancer in developing countries and ranks fourth in terms of death causes. Helicobacter pylori infection is a significant contributor to the emergence of gastric cancer. Lack of early diagnosis of gastric cancer is a leading cause of death. Aims: To identify the key genes and pathways involved in gastric cancer. Methods: This study performed a comprehensive analysis of RNA-Seq data from human gastric cancer and adjacent normal tissues. Raw data passed quality checks with FastQC and were aligned to GRCh38 using HISAT2. Subread's FeatureCounts handled transcript assembly and quantification. DESeq2 pinpointed significant genes, while ClueGO explored gene ontology and KEGG pathways. Protein-protein interaction networks, constructed with StringApp, aided in identifying hub genes through CytoHubba. This holistic approach yields insights into the molecular mechanisms underpinning gastric cancer. Results: This study detected 711 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between normal and gastric samples. A total of 594 genes were identified as upregulated and 117 as downregulated. Major DEGs are enriched in signal transduction, stimulus-response regulation, transmembrane signaling receptor activity, and signal transduction pathways involving cytokines. In addition, 20 hub genes from the PPI network were identified based on MCC rank analysis from the CytoHubba plugin, contributing to the progression of gastric cancer. Conclusions: The top six hub genes, CD4, CTLA4, CD28, CD80, CD27, and SELL, are expected to regulate several pathways and may serve as potential biomarkers for the early detection and treatment of gastric cancer 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".