Relationship Between Plasma Estradiol Levels and Estrogen-Responsive Gene Expression in Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine whether plasma estradiol (E2) levels are related to gene expression in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers in postmenopausal women. Materials and METHODS Genome-wide RNA profiles were obtained from pretreatment core-cut tumor biopsies from 104 postmenopausal patients with primary ER-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant anastrozole. Pretreatment plasma E2 levels were determined by highly sensitive radioimmunoassay. Genes were identified for which expression was correlated with pretreatment plasma E2 levels. Validation was performed in an independent set of 73 ER-positive breast cancers. Results The expression of many known estrogen-responsive genes and gene sets was highly significantly associated with plasma E2 levels (eg, TFF1/pS2, GREB1, PDZK1 and PGR; P < .005). Plasma E2 explained 27% of the average expression of these four average estrogen-responsive genes (ie, AvERG; r = 0.51; P < .0001), and a standardized mean of plasma E2 levels and ER transcript levels explained 37% (r, 0.61). These observations were validated in an independent set of 73 ER-positive tumors. Exploratory analysis suggested that addition of the nuclear coregulators in a multivariable analysis with ER and E2 levels might additionally improve the relationship with the AvERG. Plasma E2 and the standardized mean of E2 and ER were both significantly correlated with 2-week Ki67, a surrogate marker of clinical outcome (r = -0.179; P = .05; and r = -0.389; P = .0005, respectively). CONCLUSION Plasma E2 levels are significantly associated with gene expression of ER-positive breast cancers and should be considered in future genomic studies of ER-positive breast cancer. The AvERG is a new experimental tool for the study of putative estrogenic stimuli of breast cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".