MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161991320 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-07-0122

FOXA1 Expression in Breast Cancer—Correlation with Luminal Subtype A and Survival

2007· article· en· W2161991320 on OpenAlexaff
Sunil Badve, Dmitry Turbin, Mangesh A. Thorat, Akira Morimiya, Torsten O. Nielsen, Charles M. Perou, Sandi Dunn, David G. Huntsman, Harikrishna Nakshatri

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFOXO transcription factor regulation
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteSchool of Medicine, Indiana University
KeywordsFOXA1Breast cancerEstrogen receptorMedicineOncologyImmunohistochemistryInternal medicineCancerCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: FOXA1, a forkhead family transcription factor, is essential for optimum expression of approximately 50% of estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha):estrogen responsive genes. FOXA1 is expressed in breast cancer cells. It segregates with genes that characterize the luminal subtypes in DNA microarray analyses. The utility of FOXA1 as a possible independent prognostic factor has not been determined in breast cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A tissue microarray comprising tumors from 438 patients with 15.4 years median follow-up was analyzed for FOXA1 expression by immunohistochemistry. Interpretable FOXA1 expression obtained in 404 patients was analyzed along with other prognostic factors like tumor grade, size, nodal status, ER, progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2/neu. RESULTS: FOXA1 expression (score >3) was seen in 300 of 404 breast cancers and it correlated with ER (P = 0.000001), PR (P = 0.00001), and luminal A subtype (P = 0.000001). Loss of expression was noted with worsening tumor grade (P = 0.001). Univariate analysis showed nodal status (P = 0.0000012), tumor size (P = 0.00001), FOXA1 (P = 0.0004), and ER (P = 0.012) to be predictors of breast cancer-specific survival. Multivariate analysis showed only nodal status (P = 0.001) and tumor size (P = 0.039) to be significant prognostic factors, whereas FOXA1 (P = 0.060) and ER (P = 0.131) were not significant. In luminal subtype A patient subgroup, FOXA1 expression was associated with better cancer-specific survival (P = 0.024) and in ER-positive subgroup, it was better predictor of cancer-specific survival (P = 0.009) than PR (P = 0.213). CONCLUSION: FOXA1 expression correlates with luminal subtype A breast cancer and it is significant predictor of cancer-specific survival in patients with ER-positive tumors. Prognostic ability of FOXA1 in these low-risk breast cancers may prove to be useful in clinical treatment decisions.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations289
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicFOXO transcription factor regulationFrench-language works237,207