MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411115338 · doi:10.1101/2025.06.05.658154

Breast Cancer Clustering Integrating Complete Gene Expression Profiles and Genetic Ancestry

2025· preprint· en· W4411115338 on OpenAlexaff
Johanna Stepanian, Alejandro Mejía‐García, Carlos A. Orozco, Jorge Duitama

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill Genome Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisCancerBreast cancerGeneGeneticsComputational biologyBiologyExpression (computer science)Gene expressionBioinformaticsOncologyMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Breast cancer (BC) remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality among women globally. Precise subtyping of BC is critical for optimizing treatment strategies. This study explored the capacity of bulk RNA- seq data to improve breast cancer characterization by analysis of complete expression profiles. We analyzed RNA-seq 274 tumor samples and six healthy tissue samples from diverse geographical origins. Using over 9,800 SNPs directly genotyped from RNA-seq data, we successfully predicted broad genetic ancestry, identifying European, African, Asian, South Asian, and Admixed American origins. Molecular subtyping through PAM50 showed ambiguous classifications for about half of the samples, underscoring the limitations of current molecular diagnostic tools. Unsupervised clustering separated tumors in three main clusters. Cluster C1 demonstrated immune activation and inflammatory response pathways, while C2 highlighted metabolic and immune interaction processes. Cluster C3 exhibited enriched metabolic regulation and adipokine signaling pathways. In silico drug sensitivity analysis identified potential therapeutic strategies, including vinorelbine and AZD6482, with cluster-specific efficacy. Our findings emphasize the integration of ancestry-informed data and complete transcriptomic profiles to redefine BC subtyping. These insights offer a foundation for more equitable, ancestry-informed therapeutic strategies and highlight the importance of diversity in cancer research.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207