Abstract 994: Colorectal cancer, adenoma and normal whole genome methylation sequencing in Africa Americans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Colorectal adenoma (CRA) to cancer (CRC) progression involves epigenetic changes including DNA methylation. Here we performed whole genome Bisulfite Next-Generation Sequencing (WGBNGS) on a normal, a tubular adenoma and a tumor patients’ tissue DNA to elucidate epigenetic drivers in normal to cancer progression. Patients and Methods: Genomic DNA was isolated from fresh frozen tissues from a patient with normal colon, from a tubular adenoma lesion (20X depth was performed on these DNA samples., Alignment, mapping and CpG methylation analyses were done. Pyrosequencing and immunohistochemistry (IHC) were used to confirm selected methylation target genes. Results: We identified 94 unique CpG sites hypermethylated in 4 novel genes in adenoma compared to normal and 180 unique CpG sites in 7 genes in cancer. Ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA) showed that the methylated genes including a novel gene ATXN7L1 were involved in WNT pathway, ubiquitination process and cross-talk with B-catenin, in the adenoma. Three of the hypermethylated genes in cancer were, Loc100506436: a novel gene with 17 unique CpG sites (EGFR pathway, cRNA CpG site hypermethylated is part of MEK1/2), GPNMB with 7 unique CpG sites (membrane protein likely in complexes with integrins) and TNFAIP2 with 8 unique CpG sites (its role was noted in Head and neck cancer). IHC confirmed the lack of GPNMB expression in cancer tissues. Conclusion: This work provides insight into differential CpG island methylation profiles in CRA, CRC vs. normal colon tissue and provides a window into the more complex factors, including alteration of known and novel genes as multiple CpG methylation drivers in colorectal carcinogenesis. Investigations into the possible roles of the novel genes targets in the context of early and prognostic methylation biomarker are underway. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 994. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-994
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".