Abstract 5221: Linking the molecular profile of colorectal tumors to germline genetic and environmental risk factors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The completion of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project for colorectal cancer (CRC) has enabled a new, focused phase of sequencing tumor samples for which genome-wide genetic, epidemiological, clinical and lifestyle data have been collected. By combining somatic mutational profiles with these aforementioned data, we may identify and report effective prevention and treatment approaches for a broader population of individuals. The advent of targeted deep sequencing approaches using DNA obtained from formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissues has made possible the genetic characterization of the large numbers of patients needed to make such an effort relevant. As a first step, we describe a custom gene panel designed from large-scale studies for targeted deep sequencing, and its application to over 4,200 CR tumors, collected by the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO). This study is designed to identify recurrent somatic mutations and copy number alterations (CNAs) for association testing with germline genetic and lifestyle and environmental risk factors for CRC, and thereby identify relevant approaches to impact cancer prevention. The targeted CRC panel includes 205 genes. Genes were primarily selected as significantly mutated genes identified from the Nurses’ Health Study and Health Professional's Follow-up Study (n = 700), and TCGA (n = 525). We also included 15 genes associated with high penetrance germline mutations and augmented the list to include genes in pathways of somatically altered genes, identified by literature review, from public databases and known to be associated with loss of heterozygosity. For these 205 genes, amplification primers were designed to include all coding regions of transcripts that are listed in the UCSC Genome Browser. For regions with CNAs, the TCGA dataset was analyzed to include regions with greater than or equal to 2 copy focal gains or losses that were found in more than 4 or 3 tumors, respectively. Candidate genes in regions with significant CNAs from the TCGA CRC publication (Nature 2012) were also included. For CNAs, 6 to 12 amplicons were designed for each of the 56 selected regions (32 gains and 24 losses). Additional target regions include: 1) 25 microsatellite loci previously used to identify defective DNA mismatch repair and 212 homoploymer repeats. These include microsatellite loci recommended by the NCI Consensus Panel for identifying MSI; 2) amelogenin (for gender); and 3) Fusobacterium to detect a putative CRC-associated pathogen in tumor biopsies. At the AACR annual meeting, we expect to present results for deep sequencing (∼1,000X) of the first 1,000 CR tumors, including any preliminarily identified pathways and subtypes that may provide the basis for association testing with germline genetic and lifestyle and environmental risk factors needed for inferring better approaches to prevention and treatment of CRC. Citation Format: Syed H. Zaidi, Catie Grasso, Jasmine Mu, Eve Shinbrot, Marios Giannakis, Charles Connolly, Ivan Borozan, Hermann Brenner, Peter Campbell, Andrew Chan, Jenny Chang-Claude, Mengmeng Du, Vincent Ferretti, Amy French, Charles Fuchs, Steven Gallinger, Levi Garraway, Andrea Gsur, Marc Gunter, Tabitha Harrison, Michael Hoffmeister, Li Hsu, Wen-Yi Huang, Jeroen Huyghe, Mathieu Lemire, Elaine Mardis, John McPherson, Polly Newcomb, Lincoln Stein, Wei Sun, Lee Timms, Quang Trinh, David Wheeler, Christina Yung, Niha Zubair, Shuji Ogino, Stephen Thibodeau, Ulrike Peters, Thomas Hudson. Linking the molecular profile of colorectal tumors to germline genetic and environmental risk factors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 5221.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».