MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009623159 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-1916

Genomic and Molecular Profiling Predicts Response to Temozolomide in Melanoma

2009· article· en· W2009623159 on OpenAlexaff
Christina K. Augustine, Jin Soo Yoo, Anil Potti, Yasunori Yoshimoto, Patricia A. Zipfel, Henry S. Friedman, Joseph R. Nevins, Francis Ali‐Osman, Douglas S. Tyler

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsImmunovaccine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemozolomideDacarbazineMelanomaMethyltransferaseMedicineCancer researchDNA methylationMethylationOncologyGene expressionBiologyGeneGliomaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Despite objective response rates of only ∼13%, temozolomide remains one of the most effective single chemotherapy agents against metastatic melanoma, second only to dacarbazine, the current standard of care for systemic treatment of melanoma. The goal of this study was to identify molecular and/or genetic markers that correlate with, and could be used to predict, response to temozolomide-based treatment regimens and that reflect the intrinsic properties of a patient's tumor. Experimental Design: Using a panel of 26 human melanoma-derived cell lines, we determined in vitro temozolomide sensitivity, O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) activity, MGMT protein expression and promoter methylation status, and mismatch repair proficiency, as well as the expression profile of 38,000 genes using an oligonucleotide-based microarray platform. Results: The results showed a broad spectrum of temozolomide sensitivity across the panel of cell lines, with IC50 values ranging from 100 μmol/L to 1 mmol/L. There was a significant correlation between measured temozolomide sensitivity and a gene expression signature–derived prediction of temozolomide sensitivity (P < 0.005). Notably, MGMT alone showed a significant correlation with temozolomide sensitivity (MGMT activity, P < 0.0001; MGMT expression, P ≤ 0.0001). The promoter methylation status of the MGMT gene, however, was not consistent with MGMT gene expression or temozolomide sensitivity. Conclusions: These results show that melanoma resistance to temozolomide is conferred predominantly by MGMT activity and suggest that MGMT expression could potentially be a useful tool for predicting the response of melanoma patients to temozolomide therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.364 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations101
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207