MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977135634 · doi:10.60692/ndnjq-hy249

Integrated analysis of cervical squamous cell carcinoma cohorts from three continents reveals conserved subtypes of prognostic significance.

2021· article· en· W6977135634 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCybernetics and Technology in Society
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsCervical cancerDiseaseHuman papillomavirusImmune systemBasal cellCytotoxic T cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cervical cancer represents one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Although low-middle income countries are disproportionately affected, our knowledge of the disease predominantly originates from populations in high-income countries. Using the largest multi-omic analysis of cervical squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) to date, totalling 643 tumours and representing patient populations from the USA, Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa, we identify two CSCC subtypes (C1 and C2) with differing prognosis. C1 tumours are largely HPV16-driven, display increased cytotoxic T-lymphocyte infiltration and frequently harbour PIK3CA and EP300 mutations. C2 tumours are associated with shorter overall survival, are frequently driven by HPVs from the HPV18-containing alpha-7 clade, harbour alterations in the Hippo signalling pathway and increased expression of immune checkpoint genes, B7-H3 (also known as CD276 ) and NT5E (also known as CD73 ) and PD-L2 (also known as PDCD1LG2 ). In conclusion, we identify two novel, therapy-relevant CSCC subtypes that share the same defining characteristics across three geographically diverse cohorts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.163 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicCybernetics and Technology in SocietyFrench-language works237,207