Artificial intelligence driven tumor risk stratification from single-cell transcriptomics using phenotype algebra
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) coupled with robust computational analysis facilitates the characterization of phenotypic heterogeneity within tumors. Current scRNA-seq analysis pipelines are capable of identifying a myriad of malignant and non-malignant cell subtypes from single-cell profiling of tumors. However, given the extent of intra-tumoral heterogeneity, it is challenging to assess the risk associated with individual cell subpopulations, primarily due to the complexity of the cancer phenotype space and the lack of clinical annotations associated with tumor scRNA-seq studies. To this end, we introduce SCellBOW, a scRNA-seq analysis framework inspired by document embedding techniques from the domain of Natural Language Processing (NLP). SCellBOW is a novel computational approach that facilitates effective identification and high-quality visualization of single-cell subpopulations. We compared SCellBOW with existing best practice methods for its ability to precisely represent phenotypically divergent cell types across multiple scRNA-seq datasets, including our in-house generated human splenocyte and matched peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) dataset. For tumor cells, SCellBOW estimates the relative risk associated with each cluster and stratifies them based on their aggressiveness. This is achieved by simulating how the presence or absence of a specific cell subpopulation influences disease prognosis. Using SCellBOW, we identified a hitherto unknown and pervasive AR−/NE low (androgen-receptor-negative, neuroendocrine-low) malignant subpopulation in metastatic prostate cancer with conspicuously high aggressiveness. Overall, the risk-stratification capabilities of SCellBOW hold promise for formulating tailored therapeutic interventions by identifying clinically relevant tumor subpopulations and their impact on prognosis.
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".