Abstract P5-03-05: Distinct molecular differences between African American/Black and White women with Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive disease that lacks well-defined molecular targets. It accounts for 15-20% of all breast cancers and disproportionately affects women of color due to both limited access to treatment and genetic variation. Recent studies identified BRCA1(or 2) and the PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN axis as targets for treatment, but these studies neglected to account for genetic variations between race. Here, we present molecular differences between African American/Black (AA) and White (W) women with TNBC to highlight the importance of accounting for race to develop effective therapy and improve long-term outcomes. Methods: This study utilized the TCGA Firehose Legacy Breast Carcinoma dataset on cBioPortal. Subjects with breast cancer and negative ER, PR, and HER2 scores were stratified into AA (n=32) and W (n=69) subgroups. Data was analyzed to compare the most altered genes, copy number variation (CNV), and survival rates between the subgroups. The logrank test was used to obtain the hazard rate. The GISTIC2 model was used to assess CNV and G-scores (G; amplitude of aberration x frequency of occurrence). Results: The main genetic differences were in PIK3CA and BRCA1(or 2) genes. PIK3CA was detected as one of the ten most altered genes in TNBC, but this alteration was found in less than 10% of the TNBC cases. Of the 10%, PIK3CA was altered in 19% of W and 9% of AA subgroup. BRCA1(2) were altered in 10%(7%) of W but 0%(3%) of AA. Additionally, structural differences in chromosomes contributed to different survival outcomes. Both groups had co-amplification in 8q, but a significant hazard rate difference (z = 5.32, p < 0.001) was found for the W compared to the AA for the MYC gene. Further, the W had significantly higher amplification at 3q (G = 0.8 in W; 0.45 in AA). It is important to note that the PIK3CA gene lies in the 3q.26 region, meaning this gene is amplified significantly in the W subgroup. The AA group had a significant deletion at 8p.23 (G=0.5 in W; 0.8 in AA). Deletion of 8p causes MYC amplification, a targetable alteration. Conclusion: Our analysis reveals critical differences between AA and W subgroups with TNBC. Thus, it is clear that targeting the PIK3CA or BRCA1(2) gene benefits the W more than the AA population. To alleviate the disproportionate burden that AA women with TNBC face, more effort must be geared to find solutions specific to the AA subgroup. A greater sample size will help determine whether MYC amplification is unique to the AA subgroup, and if so, it could be targeted to improve outcomes of AA women with TNBC. Nevertheless, more data and research is needed to understand causes and decrease the rate of disparate outcomes in patients with TNBC. Citation Format: So Hyeon Park, Roy Khalife, Evan White, Anthony Magliocco. Distinct molecular differences between African American/Black and White women with Triple Negative Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-03-05.
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 | 0,001 | 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) | 0,005 | 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 ».