MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133103739

Hypertranscription in Human Cancer

2022· dissertation· W7133103739 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Zatzman

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerGene expressionGeneDiseaseTranscription (linguistics)Regulation of gene expressionTranscription factorCancer cell
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer is a disease driven by aberrant gene expression leading to uncontrolled cellular proliferation. To date, tens-of-thousands of patient tumors have undergone RNA-sequencing, creating a catalog of the genes and pathways differentially expressed in cancer tissues. Despite these significant advances, a fundamental aspect of gene regulation remains poorly characterized: the overall expression level across all genes. Recent work has demonstrated that certain oncogenes, such as MYC, might drive tumor growth by globally increasing transcription of all active genes, a phenomenon known as hypertranscription. While hypertranscription has been studied in model systems and cell lines, where drugs that dampen global transcription have shown promise against aggressive ‘transcriptionally addicted’ cancers, hypertranscription has never been characterized in human patients. Thus, we do not know hypertranscription’s prevalence across cancer types, its drivers, or its impact on patient outcomes. This gap in knowledge is driven in large part by the absence of appropriate methods to accurately measure global transcription. Nearly all reported gene expression estimates incorrectly assume relatively equal RNA output across samples. In Chapter 2, a novel computational method is developed that allows joint measurement of global and focal gene expression changes in patient tumor RNA-sequencing data. Critically, this method accounts for differences in tumor purity and ploidy, providing a direct fold-change measure in overall cancer-cell transcription. In Chapter 3, this method is applied to 7,494 tumor samples spanning 31 types, revealing that hypertranscription is a hallmark of aggressive cancers, with over 40% of all cancers harboring hypertranscription levels of at least 2-fold. Investigation of single-cell RNA-sequencing data revealed hypertranscriptional clones that dominated transcript production regardless of their size. Exploration of transcription factors revealed that loss of transcriptional suppression may be fundamental to the hypertranscriptional phenotype. In Chapter 4, the clinical implications of hypertranscription are explored. Hypertranscription defined patient subgroups with worse survival across multiple cancers, even within well-established subtypes. Finally, patients with hypertranscribed mutations have improved response to immune checkpoint therapy. Taken together, this work provides fundamental insights into gene dysregulation across human cancers and may prove useful in identifying patients that would benefit from novel therapies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.346
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207