Exploring the prognostic value and biological pathways of transcriptomics and radiomics patterns in glioblastoma multiforme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To develop a multi-omics prognostic model integrating transcriptomics and radiomics for predicting overall survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and investigate the biological pathways of radiomics patterns. Materials and methods: Transcription profiles of GBM patients and normal controls were used to obtain differentially expressed mRNAs and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). Radiomics features were extracted from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression was employed to select survival-associated features for the construction of transcriptomics and radiomics signatures. Genes associated with GBM prognosis were identified through the analysis of lncRNA-mRNA co-expression networks and Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA), and their biological pathways were investigated using Genomes enrichment analysis. Transcriptomics, radiomics, and clinical data were integrated to evaluate the multi-omics prognostic model's performance. Results: LASSO Cox regression yielded 21 survival-related features, including 19 transcriptomics features and 2 radiomics features. Based on transcriptomics and radiomics signature, GBM patients were classified as high-risk or low-risk. The genes obtained from the co-expression network screen were associated with microtubule binding, while those from the WGCNA screen were associated with growth factor receptor binding. In the training set, the AUC values for the multi-omics model and clinical model were 0.964 and 0.830, respectively, while in the validation set, they were 0.907 and 0.787. The multi-omics prognostic model outperformed the clinical prognostic model. Conclusions: The co-expression network and WGCNA methods revealed genes associated with multiple biological pathways in GBM. The multi-omics prognostic model demonstrated excellent performance and indicated significant potential for clinical application.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".