MP17-16 COMPARING INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE TO GRADE AND STAGE: A COPY NUMBER ALTERATION CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP17-16 COMPARING INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE TO GRADE AND STAGE: A COPY NUMBER ALTERATION CHARACTERIZATION STUDY Helen Pantazopoulos, Afnan Al-Saleh, Mame Kany Diop, David Boucher Roy, Roy Nitulescu, Roula Albadine, and Dominique Trudel Helen PantazopoulosHelen Pantazopoulos More articles by this author , Afnan Al-SalehAfnan Al-Saleh More articles by this author , Mame Kany DiopMame Kany Diop More articles by this author , David Boucher RoyDavid Boucher Roy More articles by this author , Roy NitulescuRoy Nitulescu More articles by this author , Roula AlbadineRoula Albadine More articles by this author , and Dominique TrudelDominique Trudel More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003237.16AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most diagnosed cancer in North American men varying greatly at clinical presentation from indolent to aggressive tumors. An aggressive subtype of PCa is intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), identified in ∼20% of men with PCa. While accurate stratification of these high-risk patients is a clinical necessity, the question arose whether IDC-P could be related to the grade or not. We hypothesized that through the genomic characterization of IDC-P, we could explore the link between IDC-P, grade, and or stage. The objective of this study was to characterize the copy number alterations (CNAs) of IDC-P to aid in the characterization of these high-risk men, while exploring whether IDC-P should be integrated into the grade or stage of PCa. METHODS: We selected 462 radical prostatectomy specimens obtained through The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Specifically, 38 patients were excluded from the original TCGA cohort (n=500) due to stage T4 and incomplete genomic data. We further characterized the TCGA cohort by identifying the IDC-P status (present or not identified) for each patient through the online available tissue. For each patient, IDC-P status was evaluated alongside the CNAs of 488 genes involved in androgen receptor signaling and or carcinogenesis. RESULTS: Out of 462 patients, 41% (191/462) were IDC-P present, and these patients were mostly of high grade (53.9%) and advanced pT3b stage (38.7%). Overall, 38 genes were significantly associated to IDC-P growth, of which, 37 genes were novel and not unique to IDC-P or documented in PCa. Specifically, 10 genes were associated to chromosome 10q deletions, including the well-recognized PTEN, while 28 genes were associated to chromosome 8q amplifications. Of the IDC-P present men identified, 36% (69/191) of these men had multiple deletions and 16% (31/191) of these men had multiple amplifications. CONCLUSIONS: We found significant deletions in 10 genes and amplifications in 28 genes in IDC-P. Importantly, high-risk men with IDC-P have numerous deletions and amplifications in the identified 38 genes. We have identified novel genes, except for PTEN. Indeed, more than 2/3 of these genes are amplified on 8q and their expression could be targeted as biomarkers of IDC-P. We are exploring the presence of these anomalies in PCa and their relation to Grade group (especially cribriform pattern) and or stage. Together, these findings will genomically characterize IDC-P and allow for improved precision in the stratification of these high-risk patients. Source of Funding: Institut du Cancer de Montréal © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e219 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Helen Pantazopoulos More articles by this author Afnan Al-Saleh More articles by this author Mame Kany Diop More articles by this author David Boucher Roy More articles by this author Roy Nitulescu More articles by this author Roula Albadine More articles by this author Dominique Trudel More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,002 |
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 ».