MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051582074 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2011-4830

Abstract 4830: Identification of differentially expressed genes and protein in bone invasive non-invasive meningiomas

2011· article· en· W2051582074 on OpenAlexaff
Shahrzade Jalali, Fateme Salahi, Taka Wataya, Kelly Burrell, Sid Croul, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Social InnovationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeningiomaPathologySkullBiologyTissue microarrayMedicineImmunohistochemistryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Meningiomas are cranial tumors arising from the meningeal coverings of the brain and while the majority grow intradurally, some can invade the underlying bone causing hyperostosis and invasion into neuronal structures. The surgical resection of such bone-invading tumors is challenging and repeat surgery is often required, resulting in significant patient morbidity. To date there has been very limited studies focused on the molecular pathophysiology of bone invading meningiomas. Our aim was to use an integrative analysis approach, performing RNA microarray and tissue microarray analysis to identify differentially expressed protein and genes involved in bone tropism of meningioma cells. Methods: We chose radiological features to define two distinct bone invading meningioma population and their control counterpart. 1) spheno-orbital meningioma and control counterpart non-bone invading sphenoid wing meningioma and 2) transbasal meningioma and control counterpart anterior skull base meningioma with no bone invasion. We identified 57 patients satisfying these bone invading classifications operated on in the past ten years at our institution. RNA was extracted for microarray analysis from paraffin-embedded tissue sections of invasive and non-invasive meningiomas and processed on Illumina Whole Genome DASL assay. Data were analyzed using Multi Expression Viewer Software (MEV). Quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) was used to verify micro-array data. We further verified our data using Tissue microarray (TMA) and examined commercially available antibodies involved in bone invasion (osteopontin, MMP2 and integrin-β1). TMA scoring was carried out with two independent observers using percentage and intensity staining.Three different meningioma cell lines (IOMMA-Lee, CH157-MN and F5 cells) were used to verify microarray results and in vitro and in vivo functional studies. Results: RNA microarray data analysis identified 222 differentially expressed genes (92 genes over-expressed and 130 genes under expressed), amongst which we can refer to over expression of PDGFRα, MMP16, MMP19, Matrilin4 and ADAMTS4 in bone-invasive relative to non-invasive meningiomas. Upregulation of these genes were verified using quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) analysis in both tumor specimens and meningioma cell lines.TMA analysis identified increased expression of both MMP2 and integrin-β1 in tumor cells of non-invasive meningiomas, and increase of vascular MMP2 expression in non-invasive compared to invasive meningiomas. Conclusions: Our results identify novel differentially expressed proteins and genes in bone-invading meningiomas compared to non-invasive meningiomas. Our baseline in-vivo mechanistic results will help design new therapeutic strategies that can control bone-invading meningioma progression and provide the basis for translation to clinical studies. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 4830. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-4830

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicBone Tumor Diagnosis and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207