Linking signaling pathways to transcriptional programs in breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer cells acquire genetic and epigenetic alterations that often lead to dysregulation of oncogenic signal transduction pathways, which in turn alters downstream transcriptional programs. Numerous methods attempt to deduce aberrant signaling pathways in tumors from mRNA data alone, but these pathway analysis approaches remain qualitative and imprecise. In this study, we present a statistical method to link upstream signaling to downstream transcriptional response by exploiting reverse phase protein array (RPPA) and mRNA expression data in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) breast cancer project. Formally, we use an algorithm called affinity regression to learn an interaction matrix between upstream signal transduction proteins and downstream transcription factors (TFs) that explains target gene expression. The trained model can then predict the TF activity, given a tumor sample's protein expression profile, or infer the signaling protein activity, given a tumor sample's gene expression profile. Breast cancers are comprised of molecularly distinct subtypes that respond differently to pathway-targeted therapies. We trained our model on the TCGA breast cancer data set and identified subtype-specific and common TF regulators of gene expression. We then used the trained tumor model to predict signaling protein activity in a panel of breast cancer cell lines for which gene expression and drug response data was available. Correlations between inferred protein activities and drug responses in breast cancer cell lines grouped several drugs that are clinically used in combination. Finally, inferred protein activity predicted the clinical outcome within the METABRIC Luminal A cohort, identifying high- and low-risk patient groups within this heterogeneous subtype.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".