MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110531477 · doi:10.1158/1557-3265.pms14-b06

Abstract B06: Chemotherapeutic agents attenuate subsequent CXCL12-induced migration of colon cancer cells by selecting for CXCR4-negative cells and increasing peptidase CD26

2015· article· en· W2110531477 on OpenAlexaff
Murray J. Cutler, Erica L. Lowthers, Cynthia L. Richard, Dagmar M. Hajducek, Paul A. Spagnuolo, Jonathan Blay

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeptidase Inhibition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancer researchPropidium iodideColorectal cancerPopulationCancer cellOxaliplatinIrinotecanMedicineCancerBiologyImmunologyInternal medicineApoptosisProgrammed cell deathBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conventional chemotherapy eliminates the bulk of colorectal cancer (CRC) following surgery. However, recurrence may occur due to the persistence of drug-resistant and cancer-initiating cells that survive exposure to the chemotherapeutic agents. The residual effects of chemotherapy on such surviving cancer cells, and the possible implication for subsequent evolution of metastatic disease, are not well understood. We evaluated the expression and function of the chemokine receptor CXCR4, which is known to enable CRC metastasis, as well as the cancer-initiating cell marker and peptidase CD26, which terminates activity of its chemokine CXCL12. The major CRC chemotherapeutics 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and SN-38 (the active metabolite of irinotecan), as well as cisplatin, doxorubicin, methotrexate and vinblastine, each caused decreases in cell-surface CXCR4 and concomitant increases in CD26 on surviving viable cells from HT-29, T84, HRT-18, SW480 and SW620 CRC cell lines. Flow cytometry revealed that the decline in CXCR4 was associated with a significant loss of CXCR4+ cells. Elevations in CD26 were observed across the entire cell population and were paralleled by increases in both the intrinsic dipeptidyl peptidase activity of CD26 as well as its capacity to bind extracellular adenosine deaminase. CD26-annexin V-propidium iodide co-staining confirmed that CD26 was elevated only on live cells. Orthotopic HT-29 xenografts treated with standard CRC chemotherapeutics 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, or oxaliplatin showed dramatic increases in CD26 compared to untreated tumors. Consistent with the loss of CXCR4 and gain in CD26, migratory responses to exogenous CXCL12 were eliminated in cells pretreated with cytotoxic agents, although cells retained basal motility. Analysis of cancer-initiating cell CD44 and CD133 subsets showed that drug treatment and elevated CD26 was most closely associated with enrichment of the CD44+CD133- cell population, suggesting benefits of standard chemotherapy may be derived from selective elimination of cell populations by the combination of complementary drugs 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin. Our results indicate that conventional anticancer agents may act to inhibit chemokine-mediated migration through eradication of CXCR4+ cells and attenuation of chemokine gradients through elevation of CD26 activity. Citation Format: Murray J. Cutler, Erica L. Lowthers, Cynthia L. Richard, Dagmar M. Hajducek, Paul A. Spagnuolo, Jonathan Blay. Chemotherapeutic agents attenuate subsequent CXCL12-induced migration of colon cancer cells by selecting for CXCR4-negative cells and increasing peptidase CD26. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Precision Medicine Series: Drug Sensitivity and Resistance: Improving Cancer Therapy; Jun 18-21, 2014; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2015;21(4 Suppl): Abstract nr B06.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicPeptidase Inhibition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207