MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract A002: Computational identification for missense mutations of bladder cancer candidate genes using TCGA datasets

2024· article· en· W4405181517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kai He, Lucas Wang, Yongsheng Bai

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Therapeutics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMissense mutationGeneticsBiologyGeneBladder cancerCancerMutationGenomeCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men. According to the American Cancer Society, there were roughly over 80,000 cases in the United States in 2023, and nine out of ten people with this cancer are over the age of 55. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project has made it possible for researchers to study mutations and other types of genetic signatures for multiple cancers including Bladder Urothelial Carcinoma (BLCA). A missense mutation is where a single nucleotide change in the DNA sequence results in the substitution of one amino acid for another in the protein. This could lead to a protein with an altered function. The impact of a missense mutation could be benign or harmful. In our previous study, 54 significant clusters for 15 cancer types were identified in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) network. In this study, we further investigated genes in two significant clusters reported for BLCA. We initially aim to identify genes that have missense mutations that have functional impact. To achieve this goal, we plugged the two clusters of genes (199) into the cBioPortal website and identified eight genes that had missense mutations or met three criteria (Firstly, numbers of mutations in sample must be greater than or equal to 5; secondly, functional impact must meet the following both: SIFT impact is deleterious and Polyphen-2 impact is possibly damaging or probably damaging): AKT3, PARP1, PRKN, APC, GNA11, KMT2A, NEGR1, and FYN. Further analysis showed what specific amino acid had been substituted at what specific position on the sequence. For example, for gene AKT3, at position 286, amino acid K had been substituted into amino acid N. Similarly, for gene PARP1, at position 913, amino acid G had been substituted into amino acid A. We then identified every amino acid missense substitution for all eight genes. By examining the mutation pattern, we hope to identify key genes as biomarkers so that therapeutic efficacy can be optimized. Citation Format: Kai He, Lucas Wang, Yongsheng Bai. Computational identification for missense mutations of bladder cancer candidate genes using TCGA datasets. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Optimizing Therapeutic Efficacy and Tolerability through Cancer Chemistry; 2024 Dec 9-11; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2024;23(12_Suppl):Abstract nr A002

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)0.006
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 venueMolecular Cancer TherapeuticsSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207