Cross-species comparison reveals therapeutic vulnerabilities halting glioblastoma progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth of a tumor is tightly linked to the distribution of its cells along a continuum of activation states. Here, we systematically decode the activation state architecture (ASA) in a glioblastoma (GBM) patient cohort through comparison to adult murine neural stem cells. Modelling of these data forecasts how tumor cells organize to sustain growth and identifies the rate of activation as the main predictor of growth. Accordingly, patients with a higher quiescence fraction exhibit improved outcomes. Further, DNA methylation arrays enable ASA-related patient stratification. Comparison of healthy and malignant gene expression dynamics reveals dysregulation of the Wnt-antagonist SFRP1 at the quiescence to activation transition. SFRP1 overexpression renders GBM quiescent and increases the overall survival of tumor-bearing mice. Surprisingly, it does so through reprogramming the tumor's stem-like methylome into an astrocyte-like one. Our findings offer a framework for patient stratification with prognostic value, biomarker identification, and therapeutic avenues to halt GBM progression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".