MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2296551054 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.brain15-b35

Abstract B35: BMP regulation of cancer stem cell quiescence is responsible for chemotherapeutic resistance in glioblastoma

2015· article· en· W2296551054 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Wu, Angela Celebre, Jeffrey Chan, Jennifer Guan, Karan Dhand, James Loukides, Jason Karamchandani, Sunit Das

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSOX2Cancer stem cellCancer researchTemozolomideStem cellStem cell markerBiologyHomeobox protein NANOGPopulationCancerImmunostainingKLF4GliomaPathologyImmunologyMedicineImmunohistochemistryEmbryonic stem cellCell biologyInduced pluripotent stem cellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Cancer stem cells (CSCs) represent a distinct cellular population that has been implicated in tumor recurrence following chemotherapy. Accumulating evidence indicates that BMP signaling plays an important role in the regulation of CSCs, and may be involved in the resistance of CSCs to cytotoxic drugs. The role of BMP pathway regulation of the CSC phenotype responsible for treatment resistance in glioblastoma (GBM) has not been explored. Methods: Paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples from GBM patients were used to evaluate the expression of markers for BMP signaling (pSMAD1/5/8), proliferation (PCNA), and stemness (SOX2) by immunostaining. We tested the self-renewal capacity of primary patient-derived glioma stem cell (GSC) lines using a sphere formation assay. Expression of stemness markers SOX2 and Bmi-1 in BMP4 treated and untreated GSCs, was analyzed by Western blotting. We also performed xenograft transplantation, whereby GSCs were injected intracranially into immunedeficient mice. When tumor formation was confirmed post-injection, mice were administrated EdU and sacrificed at successive time points thereafter. The frequency of all EdU positive cells as well as ID-1positive/ EdU positive cells was quantified from the primary tumor sections throughout the labeling and chase. To study chemoresistance in glioblastoma, GSC lines were treated with graded concentrations of temozolomide (TMZ). Results: We found that pSMAD1/5/8 positive cells in primary patient tumors were largely PCNA-negative. BMP4 treatment inhibited GSC proliferation and self-renewal (sphere-formation), but did not abolish expression of markers of stemness, such as Sox2 and Bmi-1, or tumorigenicity. In our in vivo model, we found ID-1 positive cells retain EdU following a long-term chase. Taken together, these results demonstrate that BMP4-enriched cells possess the characteristics of a quiescent stem cell population. BMP4 treatment protects GSCs against TMZ-induced growth inhibition. Furthermore, pSMAD1/5/8-expressing cells do not possess the DNA damage marker gamma-H2AX following TMZ treatment, suggesting that activation of the BMP pathway protects GSCs against TMZ-induced DNA damage. Conclusion: This study establishes that the BMP signaling pathway is involved in the maintenance of GSC quiescence and may play a role in glioblastoma chemoresistance. Citation Format: Megan YiJun Wu, Angela Celebre, Jeffrey Chan, Jennifer Guan, Karan Dhand, James Loukides, Jason Karamchandani, Sunit Das. BMP regulation of cancer stem cell quiescence is responsible for chemotherapeutic resistance in glioblastoma. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Advances in Brain Cancer Research; May 27-30, 2015; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(23 Suppl):Abstract nr B35.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Cells and Metastasis→French-language works237,207→