来自杂志 Journal of Translational Medicine 的文献。
当前共找到 2 篇文献分享。
1.
孤舟蓑笠翁 (2025-11-25 15:34):
paper 【doi】10.1186/s12967-025-06918-0;【发表年份】2025年;【期刊】Journal of Translational Medicine;【标题】Machine learning-enhanced discovery of a basement membrane-related gene signature in glioblastoma via single-cell and Spatial transcriptomics。【内容总结】本研究旨在探索基底膜(BM)相关基因在胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)中的预后价值并开发预测模型,通过整合四个GBM队列(共614个样本)并采用差异基因分析、二元分类机器学习(如神经网络、LASSO、支持向量机等14种算法)筛选出86个核心BM基因,进而利用单变量Cox回归和多种机器学习组合(如随机生存森林、LASSO等10种算法)构建了包含FOS、ADM、PLOD3和AEBP1四个基因的BMRGs风险模型,该模型在验证队列中C指数达0.607,能有效区分高风险组(预后差)和低风险组(生存期更优),并发现高风险组与免疫抑制微环境(如M2巨噬细胞浸润增加、CD8+T细胞减少)、免疫治疗耐药性(TIDE评分更高)及对特定化疗药物(如卡铂替康)敏感性相关;单细胞和空间转录组分析进一步揭示高风险肿瘤细胞具有更强的细胞间通讯功能,且FOS可能调控其他基因表达,独立队列验证(17例患者)通过免疫组化和多重免疫荧光证实了基因共定位及模型临床可行性。
2.
孤舟蓑笠翁 (2025-01-31 23:36):
#paper 10.1186/s12967-023-04576-8。2023。Harnessing large language models (LLMs) for candidate gene prioritization and selection。该论文探讨了用大语言模型以知识驱动的方式对组学数据得到的一大堆基因进行解读、筛选,从而加速获得临床见解的可行性。结果发现OpenAI的GPT-4和Anthropic的Claude表现最佳。我的一个重要收获是发现对于目前的大语言模型的有效使用不是自己原来想的简单的提问就可以的,而是貌似应该是像完成一个项目分解为小的任务,然后逐步推进、整合额外信息,最后得出结论。这提醒我要想用好目前的大语言模型,需要学习如何提问。
Abstract:
AbstractBackgroundFeature selection is a critical step for translating advances afforded by systems-scale molecular profiling into actionable clinical insights. While data-driven methods are commonly utilized for selecting candidate genes, knowledge-driven methods … >>>
AbstractBackgroundFeature selection is a critical step for translating advances afforded by systems-scale molecular profiling into actionable clinical insights. While data-driven methods are commonly utilized for selecting candidate genes, knowledge-driven methods must contend with the challenge of efficiently sifting through extensive volumes of biomedical information. This work aimed to assess the utility of large language models (LLMs) for knowledge-driven gene prioritization and selection.MethodsIn this proof of concept, we focused on 11 blood transcriptional modules associated with an Erythroid cells signature. We evaluated four leading LLMs across multiple tasks. Next, we established a workflow leveraging LLMs. The steps consisted of: (1) Selecting one of the 11 modules; (2) Identifying functional convergences among constituent genes using the LLMs; (3) Scoring candidate genes across six criteria capturing the gene’s biological and clinical relevance; (4) Prioritizing candidate genes and summarizing justifications; (5) Fact-checking justifications and identifying supporting references; (6) Selecting a top candidate gene based on validated scoring justifications; and (7) Factoring in transcriptome profiling data to finalize the selection of the top candidate gene.ResultsOf the four LLMs evaluated, OpenAI's GPT-4 and Anthropic's Claude demonstrated the best performance and were chosen for the implementation of the candidate gene prioritization and selection workflow. This workflow was run in parallel for each of the 11 erythroid cell modules by participants in a data mining workshop. Module M9.2 served as an illustrative use case. The 30 candidate genes forming this module were assessed, and the top five scoring genes were identified as BCL2L1, ALAS2, SLC4A1, CA1, and FECH. Researchers carefully fact-checked the summarized scoring justifications, after which the LLMs were prompted to select a top candidate based on this information. GPT-4 initially chose BCL2L1, while Claude selected ALAS2. When transcriptional profiling data from three reference datasets were provided for additional context, GPT-4 revised its initial choice to ALAS2, whereas Claude reaffirmed its original selection for this module.ConclusionsTaken together, our findings highlight the ability of LLMs to prioritize candidate genes with minimal human intervention. This suggests the potential of this technology to boost productivity, especially for tasks that require leveraging extensive biomedical knowledge. <<<
翻译
回到顶部