MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407132882 · doi:10.2196/65645

Investigating Associations Between Prognostic Factors in Gliomas: Unsupervised Multiple Correspondence Analysis

2025· article· en· W4407132882 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Eduarda Goes Job, Heidge Fukumasu, Tathiane M. Malta, Pedro Luiz Porfírio Xavier

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) is an unsupervised data science methodology that aims to identify and represent associations between categorical variables. Gliomas are an aggressive type of cancer characterized by diverse molecular and clinical features that serve as key prognostic factors. Thus, advanced computational approaches are essential to enhance the analysis and interpretation of the associations between clinical and molecular features in gliomas. Objective: This study aims to apply MCA to identify associations between glioma prognostic factors and also explore their associations with stemness phenotype. Methods: Clinical and molecular data from 448 patients with brain tumors were obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas. The DNA methylation stemness index, derived from DNA methylation patterns, was built using a one-class logistic regression. Associations between variables were evaluated using the χ² test with k degrees of freedom, followed by analysis of the adjusted standardized residuals (ASRs >1.96 indicate a significant association between variables). MCA was used to uncover associations between glioma prognostic factors and stemness. Results: Our analysis revealed significant associations among molecular and clinical characteristics in gliomas. Additionally, we demonstrated the capability of MCA to identify associations between stemness and these prognostic factors. Our results exhibited a strong association between higher DNA methylation stemness index and features related to poorer prognosis such as glioblastoma cancer type (ASR: 8.507), grade 4 (ASR: 8.507), isocitrate dehydrogenase wild type (ASR:15.904), unmethylated MGMT (methylguanine methyltransferase) Promoter (ASR: 9.983), and telomerase reverse transcriptase expression (ASR: 3.351), demonstrating the utility of MCA as an analytical tool for elucidating potential prognostic factors. Conclusions: MCA is a valuable tool for understanding the complex interdependence of prognostic markers in gliomas. MCA facilitates the exploration of large-scale datasets and enhances the identification of significant associations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Bioinformatics and BiotechnologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207