← BioTransfer GEO Dataset Finder
GEO series

Cross-platform comparison of gene expression-based cancer molecular subtyping reveals discrepancies with exome capture methods

GSE313117 Homo sapiens (human) RNA-seq (gene expression) 158 samples Submitted 2025/12/15 Platform GPL24676Platform GPL18573
At a glance

RNA-seq (gene expression) · human · 158 samples

What it is
RNA-seq (gene expression)Gene activity measured by sequencing. The summary does not mention single-cell work, so this is most likely bulk: one average per sample, the usual starting point for comparing groups.
Organism
Homo sapiens (human)
Topic
Pancreatic cancerThis series is part of our curated briefing on it.
Samples
158 samples: 158 samples, each with a distinct title — no replicated groupsGroups are read from the sample names, not from the paper. Check the list below.
Data you can get
A processed table (series matrix) and supplementary files from NCBI; the raw sequencing reads from ENA. Which of these hold counts depends on the study, so check the file list.
Paper
Cross-platform comparison of gene expression-based cancer molecular subtyping reveals discrepancies with exome capture methodsNPJ precision oncology · 2025
Summary (written by the submitters)
Gene expression profiling assays in precision oncology is increasing with uncertain validity across platforms. In this study, we examined the application of PurIST, a molecular subtyping algorithm for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), across different platforms. We compared PurIST calls between matched samples processed by whole transcriptome and commercial exome capture RNA-seq.
Read the full summary ↓
In parallel, we compared subtypes between matched samples processed by NanoString and whole transcriptome RNA-seq from the PANCREAS trial (NCT04683315). Between whole transcriptome and exome capture, subtype agreement was 81% with significant increase in basal-like subtype with exome capture. Differences in overall survival in patients with basal-like tumors compared to classical tumors did not reach statistical significance using exome capture (log-rank P = 0.061), whereas with whole transcriptome it was significantly shorter (log-rank P < 0.0001). Subtype agreement between whole transcriptome RNA-seq and NanoString was higher at 95%. PurIST results should be interpreted with caution when using exome capture method.
Published in
Cross-platform comparison of gene expression-based cancer molecular subtyping reveals discrepancies with exome capture methods
Lee JJ, Aldakkak M, Morrison AB et al. · NPJ precision oncology 2025 · PMID 41422185 · doi:10.1038/s41698-025-01228-6
This dataset
Download · which file do I need?

Direct links to NCBI and ENA, no account and no request form. Pick by what you want to do: take the small processed table to look, the supplementary files to re-analyse, or the original raw data to start over.

1 · Just have a look

Processed table

The series matrix: one table of values per sample as the submitters processed it. The smallest download, and it opens in Excel or R. Start here to see what the data look like.

2 · Re-analyse it

Supplementary files

The count tables and other files the authors uploaded. Take only the samples you need, or the whole study as GSE313117_RAW.tar (it can run to tens of gigabytes).

3 · Start from the raw reads

Raw sequencing reads

The original FASTQ files, straight from the sequencer, held at ENA. Large, and you align them yourself, so only choose this if you need to re-process the study from scratch.

What the files usually look like: For RNA-seq the counts are usually a table among the supplementary files (look for 'counts', 'expression', 'FPKM' or 'TPM' in the file name). The series matrix of a sequencing study is sometimes nearly empty.

Also filed as BioProject PRJNA1378562. Searching any of these in the dataset finder brings you back here.

Study design
158 samples, each with a distinct title — no replicated groups

Any grouping that defines a comparison lives in the sample characteristics, which GEO records separately from the titles.

How we read this: Read from 158 sample titles: 158 distinct titles with little repetition. These groups are guessed from the sample names, not taken from the paper, so check them against the sample list below before relying on them.

Samples in this study

+ 118 more — browse all 158 samples with per-sample file links →

More Pancreatic cancer datasets

Search all human RNA-seq datasets in GEO →

Share this dataset

Metadata from NCBI GEO, cached and refreshed periodically — the NCBI page above is authoritative. Downloads link straight to NCBI/ENA; nothing is proxied through BioTransfer.