Integrative analysis of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity and monoallelic expression at nucleotide resolution reveals disrupted pathways in triple-negative breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) and copy number alteration (CNA) feature prominently in the somatic genomic landscape of tumors. As such, karyotypic aberrations in cancer genomes have been studied extensively to discover novel oncogenes and tumor-suppressor genes. Advances in sequencing technology have enabled the cost-effective detection of tumor genome and transcriptome mutation events at single-base-pair resolution; however, computational methods for predicting segmental regions of LOH in this context are not yet fully explored. Consequently, whole transcriptome, nucleotide-level resolution analysis of monoallelic expression patterns associated with LOH has not yet been undertaken in cancer. We developed a novel approach for inference of LOH from paired tumor/normal sequence data and applied it to a cohort of 23 triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) genomes. Following extensive benchmarking experiments, we describe the nucleotide-resolution landscape of LOH in TNBC and assess the consequent effect of LOH on the transcriptomes of these tumors using RNA-seq-derived measurements of allele-specific expression. We show that the majority of monoallelic expression in the transcriptomes of triple-negative breast cancer can be explained by genomic regions of LOH and establish an upper bound for monoallelic expression that may be explained by other tumor-specific modifications such as epigenetics or mutations. Monoallelically expressed genes associated with LOH reveal that cell cycle, homologous recombination and actin-cytoskeletal functions are putatively disrupted by LOH in TNBC. Finally, we show how inference of LOH can be used to interpret allele frequencies of somatic mutations and postulate on temporal ordering of mutations in the evolutionary history of these tumors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".