MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PD16-03 UNDERSTANDING THE MOLECULAR CHARACTERISTICS AND VULNERABILITIES OF SARCOMATOID/RHABDOID RENAL CELL CARCINOMAS THROUGH INTEGRATIVE HISTOLOGICAL AND SPATIAL GENOMICS APPROACHES

2024· article· en· W4394803244 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mustafa Soytaş, Tamiko Nishimura, Madeleine Arseneault, Eleonora Scarlata, Kate Glennon, Peixi Liu, Senthilkumar Kailasam, Fadi Brimo, Simon Tanguay, Yasser Riazalhosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomicsBiologyComputational biologyPathologyMedicineGenomeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Basic Research & Pathophysiology I (PD16)1 May 2024PD16-03 UNDERSTANDING THE MOLECULAR CHARACTERISTICS AND VULNERABILITIES OF SARCOMATOID/RHABDOID RENAL CELL CARCINOMAS THROUGH INTEGRATIVE HISTOLOGICAL AND SPATIAL GENOMICS APPROACHES Mustafa Soytas, Tamiko Nishimura, Madeleine Arseneault, Eleonora Scarlata, Kate Glennon, Peixi Liu, Senthilkumar Kailasam, Fadi Brimo, Simon Tanguay, and Yasser Riazalhosseini Mustafa SoytasMustafa Soytas , Tamiko NishimuraTamiko Nishimura , Madeleine ArseneaultMadeleine Arseneault , Eleonora ScarlataEleonora Scarlata , Kate GlennonKate Glennon , Peixi LiuPeixi Liu , Senthilkumar KailasamSenthilkumar Kailasam , Fadi BrimoFadi Brimo , Simon TanguaySimon Tanguay , and Yasser RiazalhosseiniYasser Riazalhosseini View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009560.23593.56.03AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Genomic and immune analyses in S/R RCC have been limited to bulk tumor analysis and thus lack cellular resolution and spatial perspective. Herein, we use in situ Whole Transcriptome Profiling (WTP) to define molecular differences between tumor regions with and without S/R features, aiming at identifying molecular markers of S/R tumors that could lead to better diagnosis or treatments. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgical excision of RCC at the MUHC between 2010 and 2020 were screened by a uropathologist, and histologically defined regions of S/R, ccRCC, papillary, chromophobe RCC, and benign kidney were selected to construct tissue microarrays (TMAs). Whole-exome sequencing (WES) and Compartment-Guided Spatial WTP were applied for gene and transcriptome analysis (Figure 1). RESULTS: A cohort of 56 RCC patients and their TMAs, consisting of 403 cores representing patient-matched tumor areas with and without S/R features. For WES, 47 patients were used to identify copy number variations (CNVs) analysis. Four hundred cores of 55 patients were used for WTP and 5 groups of clustered with 2000 highly variable genes (HVGs) were constructed. The most variable genes of each tumor type were identified by using digital spatial transcriptome profiling (Figure 2). Whole-exome sequencing was used to identify mutational patterns of tumor cells using a list of specific genes of interest (Figure 3). CONCLUSIONS: According to current and ongoing results, WES, and compartment-guided WTP should be used to generate an unprecedented resolution to the molecular and genomic characteristics of S/R RCC tumors and tumor microenvironment. Download PPTDownload PPTDownload PPT Source of Funding: The Kidney Foundation of Canada © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e366 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Mustafa Soytas More articles by this author Tamiko Nishimura More articles by this author Madeleine Arseneault More articles by this author Eleonora Scarlata More articles by this author Kate Glennon More articles by this author Peixi Liu More articles by this author Senthilkumar Kailasam More articles by this author Fadi Brimo More articles by this author Simon Tanguay More articles by this author Yasser Riazalhosseini More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207