MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389941531 · doi:10.1080/07391102.2023.2295382

Machine learning and experimental screening of chromatin regulator signatures and potential drugs in hepatitis B related hepatocellular carcinoma

2023· article· en· W4389941531 on OpenAlexaff
Caixia Jia, Mantang Chen, Xueting Wang, Xingliang Yang, Hong‐Xing Wu, Aiping Chen, Jingzhong Li, Kunlin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Genetics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaRegulatorChromatinCancer researchMedicineChemistryComputational biologyPharmacologyBiologyBiochemistryDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many evidences have confirmed that chromatin regulator factors (CRs) are involved in the progression of cancer, but its potential mechanism of affecting hepatitis B related hepatocellular carcinoma still needs to be studied. Our study detected the CRs that affect hepatitis B related hepatocellular carcinoma (HBV-HCC) through machine learning analysis, conducted the analysis of immune cells, constructed the relevant risk model and immune function infiltration, and predicted the potential therapeutic drugs. We found that these CRs were significantly related to the immune cells of Macrophages, B cells, CD8+T cells, etc., and PBK, AURKA, TOP2A and AURKB were the potential risk CRs of HBV-HCC. The expression levels of these four CRs increased in HepG2.2.15 cells and the liver of HBV-HCC patients, consistent with the predicted risk model. Subsequently, ten potential drugs closely related to the risk CRs were finally obtained, experimental research on resveratrol has shown that it can inhibit the proliferation of HepG2.2.15 cells and potentially inhibit the occurrence and development of HBV-HCC. Our study provides novel insights into the function of CRs in HBV-HCC and certain ideas for more accurate targeted therapy.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomolecular Structure and DynamicsSame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207