Strength of spatial correlation between gray matter connectivity and patterns of proto-oncogene and neural network construction gene expression is associated with diffuse glioma survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Like other forms of neuropathology, gliomas appear to spread along neural pathways. Accordingly, our group and others have previously shown that brain network connectivity is highly predictive of glioma survival. In this study, we aimed to examine the molecular mechanisms of this relationship via imaging transcriptomics. Methods We retrospectively obtained presurgical, T1-weighted MRI datasets from 669 adult patients, newly diagnosed with diffuse glioma. We measured brain connectivity using gray matter networks and coregistered these data with a transcriptomic brain atlas to determine the spatial co-localization between brain connectivity and expression patterns for 14 proto-oncogenes and 3 neural network construction genes. Results We found that all 17 genes were significantly co-localized with brain connectivity (p < 0.03, corrected). The strength of co-localization was highly predictive of overall survival in a cross-validated Cox Proportional Hazards model (mean area under the curve, AUC = 0.68 +/− 0.01) and significantly (p < 0.001) more so for a random forest survival model (mean AUC = 0.97 +/− 0.06). Bayesian network analysis demonstrated direct and indirect causal relationships among gene-brain co-localizations and survival. Gene ontology analysis showed that metabolic processes were overexpressed when spatial co-localization between brain connectivity and gene transcription was highest (p < 0.001). Drug-gene interaction analysis identified 84 potential candidate therapies based on our findings. Discussion Our findings provide novel insights regarding how gene-brain connectivity interactions may affect glioma survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".