Whole genome and transcriptome integrated analyses guide clinical care of pediatric poor prognosis cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role for routine whole genome and transcriptome analysis (WGTA) for poor prognosis pediatric cancers remains undetermined. Here, we characterize somatic mutations, structural rearrangements, copy number variants, gene expression, immuno-profiles and germline cancer predisposition variants in children and adolescents with relapsed, refractory or poor prognosis malignancies who underwent somatic WGTA and matched germline sequencing. Seventy-nine participants with a median age at enrollment of 8.8 y (range 6 months to 21.2 y) are included. Germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants are identified in 12% of participants, of which 60% were not known prior. Therapeutically actionable variants are identified by targeted gene report and whole genome in 32% and 62% of participants, respectively, and increase to 96% after integrating transcriptome analyses. Thirty-two molecularly informed therapies are pursued in 28 participants with 54% achieving a clinical benefit rate; objective response or stable disease ≥6 months. Integrated WGTA identifies therapeutically actionable variants in almost all tumors and are directly translatable to clinical care of children with poor prognosis cancers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".