MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317611189 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou208.14

DETAILED MOLECULAR CHARACTERISATION OF DIFFUSE INTRINSIC PONTINE GLIOMAS IDENTIFIES THREE MOLECULAR SUBGROUPS AND A NOVEL CANCER DRIVER, ACVR1

2014· article· en· W2317611189 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Hawkins, Pawel Buczkowicz, Christine M. Hoeman, Patricia Rakopoulos, Sanja Pajovic, A. Morrison, Chris Jones, Éric Bouffet, Ute Bartels, Oren J. Becher

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA methylationCpG siteCancerExome sequencingMethylationComputational biologyMedicineGenomeGeneticsBiologyMutationGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) is a devastating pediatric brain tumor with no effective therapy and near 100% fatality. The failure of most therapies can be attributed to the delicate location of these tumors and choosing therapies based on assumptions that DIPGs are molecularly similar to adult disease. Recent studies have unraveled the unique genetic make-up of this brain cancer with nearly 80% harboring a K27M-H3.3 or K27M-H3.1 mutation. However, DIPGs are still thought of as one disease with limited understanding of the genetic drivers of these tumors. This data is critical for the development of better therapies for these children. METHODS: Here we describe deep-sequencing analysis of 36 tumor–normal pairs (20 whole genome sequencing (WGS; Illumina Hiseq 2000) and 16 whole exome sequencing (WES; Applied Biosystems SOLiD 5500xl)), integrated with comprehensive methylation (28 DIPGs; Illumina Infinium450K methylation array), copy number (45 DIPGs, Affymetrix SNP6.0) and expression data (35 DIPGs; Illumina HT-12 v4). RESULTS: Unsupervised subgrouping of DIPGs based on CpG island methylation resulted in three distinct subgroups; MYCN, Silent, and H3-K27M. This subgrouping was supported by multiple analyses including principal components analysis, non-negative matrix factorization and consensus clustering. Subgroup-specific differences were supported by integration of mutation, structural, expression and clinical data. The MYCN subgroup DIPGs are not associated with histone mutations and are instead characterized by hypermethylation and catastrophic shattering of chromosome 2p with high-level copy number amplifications of MYCN and ID2. The Silent subgroup has genomes with minimal instability, fewer mutations and over-expression of WNT pathway genes. The H3-K27M subgroup is highly K27M-H3 mutated but is typically associated with additional genetic alterations including activating mutations in ACVR1, frequent RB1 deletions, TP53 deletions/mutations, PVT-1/MYC or PDGFRA gains/amplifications, genomic instability and alternative lengthening of telomeres. After H3F3A and TP53, the next most frequently mutated gene in DIPG is ACVR1 (activin A receptor, type I), a novel cancer gene. Mutations of ACVR1 in four DIPGs (c.617G > A) result in a R206H substitution. One DIPG had a mutation of a neighboring codon (Q207E). Two DIPGs had a c.983G > A (G328E) mutation and five DIPGs in our cohort had a c983G > T mutation which results in a G328V substitution. In total 20% of DIPGs have ACVR1 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the many pathways to tumorigenesis in DIPG. This complexity needs to be considered when designing new therapeutic approaches in order to improve outcome for these children. SECONDARY CATEGORY: n/a.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207