MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321326542 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2013-2919

Abstract 2919: Different ROS control mechanisms and mutagenic consequences in primitive subsets of normal human mammary cells.

2013· article· en· W2321326542 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nagarajan Kannan, Maisam Makarem, Long Nguyen, Peter Eirew, Connie J. Eaves

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRedox biology and oxidative stress
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactive oxygen speciesGlutathione peroxidaseSuperoxide dismutaseProgenitor cellCell biologyGlutathioneMitochondrial ROSCarcinogenesisDNA damageOxidative stressBiologyChemistryBiochemistryStem cellEnzymeDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are known mediators of DNA damage and likely contributors to oncogenesis. However, very little is known about the mechanisms controlling ROS in the cells that make up the normal human mammary gland, in spite of its being a major site of cancer development. To investigate how ROS are generated and their potential role in two functionally distinct, primitive normal human mammary epithelial cell compartments (luminal and basal), we isolated these subsets at high purities by FACS and compared the levels within them of ROS, components that positively and negatively regulate ROS, their responses to oxidative stressors and evidence of ROS-associated DNA damage. The results show that purified progenitors of the cells that line the gland lumen (defined by their EpCAM+ CD49f+ phenotype) contain significantly higher levels of superoxide (O2*) anions and H2O2 than the basal cells (defined as EpCAMlow/- CD49fhigh cells and highly enriched in bipotent progenitors and stem cells). We also find that the elevated levels of these ROS elements in the luminal progenitors are associated with a higher content of mitochondria and higher levels of all 3 superoxide dismutases (SOD-1, 2 and 3). The luminal progenitors are also highly resistant to glutathione depletion and express higher levels of both non-canonical non-glutathione anti-oxidant enzymes and multiple enzymes that control ROS-induced nucleotide damage (i.e., OGG-1, MTH-1, MUTYH) providing a likely explanation for their ability to survive following GSH depletion. Interestingly, we found the mitochondrial antioxidant glutathione peroxidase (GPX)-2 enzyme to be expressed almost exclusively and at high levels in basal mammary cells and its depletion, using a shRNA lentivirus, resulted in loss of progenitor viability/activity by basal but not luminal cells. Luminal progenitors also displayed greater resistance to acute oxidative insults (H2O2 and X-radiation) and displayed an increased accrual of oxidative damage-induced (genomic 8-oxo-dGTP) mutations. Our findings reveal a major difference in the molecular machinery that control ROS levels in normal human basal and luminal mammary progenitors. These correlate with an ability of the luminal progenitors to maintain and tolerate elevated levels of ROS and the continuous acquisition of unrepaired ROS-induced DNA damage, thus suggesting a novel and previously unanticipated vulnerability of these cells to undergo oncogenic transformation. (Supported by Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation/BC-Yukon and the Canadian Cancer Society) Citation Format: Nagarajan Kannan, Maisam Makarem, Long Nguyen, Jeff Dong, Peter Eirew, Connie Eaves. Different ROS control mechanisms and mutagenic consequences in primitive subsets of normal human mammary cells. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2919. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-2919

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.313 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicRedox biology and oxidative stressFrench-language works237,207