Comprehensive molecular classification predicted microenvironment profiles and therapy response for HCC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Tumor microenvironment (TME) heterogeneity leads to a discrepancy in survival prognosis and clinical treatment response for patients with HCC. The clinical applications of documented molecular subtypes are constrained by several issues. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We integrated 3 single-cell data sets to describe the TME landscape and identified 6 prognosis-related cell subclusters. Unsupervised clustering of subcluster-specific markers was performed to generate transcriptomic subtypes. The predictive value of these molecular subtypes for prognosis and treatment response was explored in multiple external HCC cohorts and the Xiangya HCC cohort. TME features were estimated using single-cell immune repertoire sequencing, mass cytometry, and multiplex immunofluorescence. The prognosis-related score was constructed based on a machine-learning algorithm. Comprehensive single-cell analysis described TME heterogeneity in HCC. The 5 transcriptomic subtypes possessed different clinical prognoses, stemness characteristics, immune landscapes, and therapeutic responses. Class 1 exhibited an inflamed phenotype with better clinical outcomes, while classes 2 and 4 were characterized by a lack of T-cell infiltration. Classes 5 and 3 indicated an inhibitory tumor immune microenvironment. Analysis of multiple therapeutic cohorts suggested that classes 5 and 3 were sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade and targeted therapy, whereas classes 1 and 2 were more responsive to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization treatment. Class 4 displayed resistance to all conventional HCC therapies. Four potential therapeutic agents and 4 targets were further identified for high prognosis-related score patients with HCC. CONCLUSIONS: Our study generated a clinically valid molecular classification to guide precision medicine in patients with HCC.
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) | 0.000 | 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".