MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079552906 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0709618105

Genomic markers for malignant progression in pulmonary adenocarcinoma with bronchioloalveolar features

2008· article· en· W2079552906 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarit Aviel‐Ronen, Bradley P. Coe, Suzanne K. Lau, Gilda da Cunha Santos, Chang‐Qi Zhu, Dan Strumpf, Igor Jurišica, Wan L. Lam, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health Network
FundersTerry Fox FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Cancer InstituteGenome Canada
KeywordsComparative genomic hybridizationBiologyAdenocarcinomaBacterial artificial chromosomeCandidate genePathologyGeneCancer researchCancerChromosomeGeneticsMedicineGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), a subtype of lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) without stromal, vascular, or pleural invasion, is considered an in situ tumor with a 100% survival rate. However, the histological criteria for invasion remain controversial. BAC-like areas may accompany otherwise invasive adenocarcinoma, referred to as mixed type adenocarcinoma with BAC features (AWBF). AWBF are considered to evolve from BAC, representing a paradigm for malignant progression in ADC. However, the supporting molecular evidence remains forthcoming. Here, we have studied the genomic changes of BAC and AWBF by array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). We used submegabase-resolution tiling set array CGH to compare the genomic profiles of 14 BAC or BAC with focal area suspicious for invasion with those of 15 AWBF. Threshold-filtering and frequency-scoring analysis found that genomic profiles of noninvasive and focally invasive BAC are indistinguishable and show fewer aberrations than tumor cells in BAC-like areas of AWBF. These aberrations occurred mainly at the subtelomeric chromosomal regions. Increased genomic alterations were noted between BAC-like and invasive areas of AWBF. We identified 113 genes that best differentiated BAC from AWBF and were considered candidate marker genes for tumor invasion and progression. Correlative gene expression analyses demonstrated a high percentage of them to be poor prognosis markers in early stage ADC. Quantitative PCR also validated the amplification and overexpression of PDCD6 and TERT on chromosome 5p and the prognostic significance of PDCD6 in early stage ADC patients. We identified candidate genes that may be responsible for and are potential markers for malignant progression in AWBF.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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

Citations65
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207