MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388589521 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noad179.0127

CNSC-44. BIOLOGICAL PATTERN DISCOVERY IN GLIOBLASTOMA

2023· article· en· W4388589521 on OpenAlexaff
Shamini Ayyadhury, Patty Sachamitr, Michelle Kushida, Nicole Park, Fiona J. Coutinho, Owen Whitley, Panagiotis Prinos, C.H. Arrowsmith, Peter B. Dirks, Trevor J. Pugh, Gary D. Bader

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreStructural Genomics ConsortiumOntario Brain InstituteSickKids FoundationCentre for Global Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlioblastomaPhenotypePixelComputational biologyBiologyComputer scienceGenePattern recognition (psychology)NeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceGeneticsCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Glioblastoma(GBM - IDH wildtype) is an adult glioma, showing abysmal prognosis. Sequencing technologies show us the existence of a neurodevelopmental frame-work, upon which heterogeneous molecular patterns are overlaid. The tumor's functional capacity is the net result of extrinsic+intrinsic molecular factors interacting with each other. These factors affect how cells communicate and organize themselves into complex functional architectures that support their evolution, survival and resistance. Understanding the phenotypic significance of a tumor's architecture, will allow us to understand these processes and compute complex patterns in GBM that are "biologically-relevant". First, we showed, as a proof-of-concept, that "biologically-relevant" signatures are imprinted within the spatial organization of cells using spatial pixel analysis. We used a phase-contrast image dataset of glioblastoma stem cells grown in culture, imaged 4-12hrly, over 12-16 days. We applied 29 hand-engineered pixel features per image, deriving spatial pixel signatures for each of our 17’601 phase-contrast images. Using different computational analytical methods and gene expression from matched bulk RNA datasets, we showed that spatial pixel patterning follows biologically relevant phenotypes. We found samples of images with high PC2 scores had higher mesenchymal/microglia scores, as compared to samples of images with low PC2 scores, which showed higher neurodevelopmental signatures. In addition, we found that mathematical algorithms describing entropy, homogeneity, contrast and complexity were clearly enriched in specific biological groups. Hence, our study showed that the organizational/architectural patterns of biological entities show preservation of fundamental organizational principles. Building upon the above data (which is currently a manuscript under preparation), we will apply these principles towards pattern discovery of GBM tissues at multiple architectural hierarchies (i.e subcellular, cellular, stroma) using different GBM models, imaging and spatial transcriptomics. If structure equates to function, understanding GBM architecture will have important applications in surgical tool developments and understanding relevant mechanistic patterns in GBM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology→Same topicCell Image Analysis Techniques→French-language works237,207→