MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2534814303 · doi:10.1182/blood.v114.22.603.603

Comparative Whole Transcriptome Shotgun Sequencing (WTSS) of Myeloma at Diagnosis and at Drug-Resistant Relapse.

2009· article· en· W2534814303 sur OpenAlexaff
Tony Reiman, Ryan D. Morin, Rodrigo Goya, Tina Wong, Yongjun Zhao, Martin Hirst, Linda M. Pilarski, Andrew R. Belch, Marco A. Marra

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of AlbertaGenome British ColumbiaSaint John Regional HospitalDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMultiple myelomaTranscriptomePopulationDrug resistanceBone marrowBiologyPanobinostatCarfilzomibCancer researchMedicineOncologyInternal medicineImmunologyGeneGene expressionGeneticsBortezomib

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 603 Background: Acquired drug resistance often limits treatment efficacy in multiple myeloma, and may in part be caused by selection for cells bearing mutations conferring drug resistance that were either present in an extant subset of myeloma cells prior to treatment, or were acquired during therapy. We are applying whole transcriptome shotgun sequencing (WTSS) to myeloma BM at diagnosis and drug-resistant relapse, in order to identify gene expression and mutational signatures of drug resistance. We have an archive of frozen myeloma total bone marrow mononuclear cell fractions, as well as a smaller archive of CD138+ enriched specimens. The enriched specimens can be expected to contain purer populations of malignant cells, but may under-represent the heterogeneity of the disease. We are therefore interested in a comparison of the results of WTSS on these two different types of specimens. Methods: Bone marrow from a myeloma patient who responded to front line drug therapy and who subsequently experienced drug resistant disease relapse was identified from our biorepository. RNA was isolated from the total bone marrow mononuclear cell population and from a CD138+ enriched population at diagnosis and at relapse, yielding four samples for analysis (pre-treatment unprocessed, pre-treatment enriched, relapse unprocessed, relapse enriched). Poly-adenylated RNA from each of the four samples was converted to cDNA using a random primed approach, and paired-end sequences collected using Illumina instruments. Results: We sequenced the transcriptomes of the four samples by generating a total of 694,076,590 36- and 50-mer sequences (30,681,959,896 base-pairs). Of these, 325,998,000 (14,063,396,516 base-pairs) were mapped to reference genome or transcriptome databases using MAQ. Each base in 3,094 transcripts was represented at a minimum of 6 fold redundant coverage. 68.57 % (223,555,599) of the reads matched perfectly to reference sequences. Reads containing single nucleotide mismatches to the reference sequence were evaluated using a Bayesian mixture model to estimate the presence of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) which yielded 89,944 high confidence predictions divided amongst the four samples. Of these, 74,704 (83.1%) were identical to known SNVs present in dbSNP and other sequence datasets, and 13,073 represented non-coding or synonymous variants. The remaining 2,167 mismatches most likely represent undiscovered variants also present in the patient's normal DNA or somatic mutations. These two possibilities will be distinguished by sequencing the candidate variants using DNA purified from the patient's non-malignant cells. For candidate sequence variant positions well represented at the position and gene level in each of the two sample pairs we were comparing (pre- and post-treatment unprocessed, and pre- and post-treatment enriched) we found 85 unique to the pre-treatment enriched sample, 145 unique to the post-treatment enriched sample, 250 unique to the pre-treatment unprocessed sample and 51 unique tunique o the post-treatment unprocessed sample. Some of the genes affected by these candidate mutations include genes that have previously been observed in cancer, such as PIM2, SHC1 and SCRIB. Gene expression levels were estimated using the previously published RPKM (reads per kilobase of exon model per million mapped reads) metric. For the unprocessed samples, 108 genes were found to be up-regulated pre-treatment and 95 post-treatment. The enriched samples presented 80 genes with higher expression before treatment and 54 after treatment. Because we are using a paired end sequencing approach, the potential exists to identify candidate expressed gene fusions. Initial searches for candidate gene fusion events have resulted in the detection of a fusion involving IgH and MMSET, corresponding to a t(4;14) translocation which had previously been detected with standard methods. Discussion: It is possible to sequence and compare the expressed myeloma genome of patients at diagnosis and at relapse with WTSS, in order to gain insight into the evolution of myeloma under drug selection and its role in the development of treatment resistance. With the study of a larger cohort of patients and subsequent functional characterization of the candidate sequence variants, we hope to identify recurrent mechanisms of myeloma drug resistance which might be amenable to therapeutic intervention. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,006

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,304
Écart entre enseignants0,263 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→Travaux en français237 207→