MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LCR-modules: a collection of workflows for cancer genome analysis

2025· preprint· en· W4414474889 on OpenAlexafffund
Kostiantyn Dreval, Laura K. Hilton, Bruno M. Grande, Krysta M. Coyle, Manuela Cruz, Sierra Gillis, Prasath Pararajalingam, Christopher Rushton, Haya Shaalan, Nicole Thomas, Helena Winata, Jasper Wong, Jacky Yiu, Christian Steidl, David W. Scott, Ryan D. Morin

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencySpinal Cord Injury BCCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreSimon Fraser University
FundersMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsWorkflowGenomicsExome sequencingSuiteGenomeScalabilityFlexibility (engineering)ExomePipeline (software)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: The surge of genomic data from advanced sequencing technologies is outpacing current analytical pipelines. We introduce LCR-modules, an open-source suite of bioinformatics tools designed for flexible and automated cancer genome data analysis. LCR-modules enables reproducible analysis of diverse cancer genomics data at scale. The suite comprises 49 Snakemake-based workflows organized into three levels, facilitating tasks from low-level quality control to complex cohort-level analyses. LCR-modules supports various sequencing types and integrates pipelines such as mutation calling, expression quantification, and cohort-level aggregation, ensuring flexibility and reproducibility. LCR-modules represents a significant advancement in genomic data analysis, reducing barriers in reproducibility and scalability and has already been applied to a combination of exomes and genomes from over 10 800 samples. AVAILABILITY: No new data were generated in support of this research. The source code for the LCR-modules is openly available at https://github.com/LCR-BCCRC/lcr-modules.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207