MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413357798 · doi:10.7717/peerj.19852

Transformative insights from transcriptome analysis of colorectal cancer patient tissues: identification of four key prognostic genes

2025· article· en· W4413357798 on OpenAlexaff
Nevin Belder, Sulgun Charyyeva, Kawalya Hakiimu, Namood-e Sahar, Nader Omidvar, Berna Savaş, Arzu Ensarı, Hi̇lal Özdağ

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuAnkara Universitesi
KeywordsColorectal cancerProportional hazards modelOncologyTranscriptomeMedicineInternal medicineGeneCancerBioinformaticsFramingham Risk ScoreComputational biologyBiologyGene expressionDiseaseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, necessitating accurate and robust predictive approaches to assist oncologists with prognosis prediction and therapeutic decision-making in clinical practice. Here, we aimed to identify key genes involved in colorectal cancer pathology and develop a model for prognosis prediction and guide therapeutic decisions in CRC patients. We profiled 49 matched tumour and normal formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples using Affymetrix HGU133-X3P arrays and identified 845 differentially expressed genes (FDR ≤ 0.001, fold change ≥2), predominantly enriched in the extracellular matrix (ECM)-receptor interaction pathway. The integrative analysis of our data with publicly available mRNA and miRNA datasets, including their differentially expressed gene analyses, identified four overexpressed genes in the ECM-receptor interaction pathway as key regulators of human CRC development and progression. These four genes were independently validated for their differential expression and association with prognosis in a newly collected CRC cohort and publicly available datasets. A prognostic risk score was developed using these genes, with patient stages weighted by multivariate Cox regression coefficients to stratify patients into low-risk and high-risk groups, showing significantly poorer overall survival (OS) in the high-risk group. In conclusion, our risk assessment model exhibits strong potential for predicting poor survival and unfavorable clinicopathological features in CRC patients, offering valuable insights for personalised management strategies.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207