MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036681504 · doi:10.4161/epi.28484

Frequent promoter hypermethylation and expression reduction of the glucocorticoid receptor gene in breast tumors

2014· article· en· W2036681504 on OpenAlexaff
Kirsten A. Nesset, Ami M. Perri, Christopher R. Mueller

Bibliographic record

VenueEpigenetics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDNA methylationMethylationGlucocorticoid receptorEpigeneticsBreast cancerCancer researchEstrogen receptorPromoterGene expressionCancerGeneInternal medicineGlucocorticoidEndocrinologyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have found that expression of the Glucocorticoid Receptor (GR) is altered or reduced in various cancers, while the GR promoter has been shown to be methylated in gastric, lung, and colorectal cancers. Examining a small cohort of matched normal and breast cancer samples we found that GR levels were dramatically reduced in almost all tumors in relation to their normal tissue. The methylation status of the GR promoter was assessed to determine if this observed decrease of expression in breast tumors could be due to epigenetic regulation. While it was not methylated in normal tissue, the GR proximal promoter was methylated in 15% of tumor samples, particularly, but not exclusively, in Estrogen Receptor positive tumors. GR expression in these tumors was particularly low and loss of GR expression was specifically correlated with methylation of the proximal promoter GR B region. Overall, these results show that hypermethylation of the promoter in tumors is a frequent event and suggests that GR may act as a tumor suppressor in breast tissue.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations46
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpigeneticsSame topicEstrogen and related hormone effectsFrench-language works237,207