MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2324431971 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-326

Abstract 326: Prognostic value of KIF14 and MDM4 in Ewing's sarcoma

2010· article· en· W2324431971 on OpenAlexaff
Fernanda Rocha Rojas Ayala, Isabela Werneck da Cunha, Maisa Yoshimoto, Maria Zieleńska, Jeremy A. Squire, Fernando Augusto Soares

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAneuploidyChromosome instabilityFluorescence in situ hybridizationChromosomeChromothripsisCell cycleCancer researchGeneticsCancerMolecular biologyGeneGenome instabilityDNA damageDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rearrangements of the long arm of chromosome 1 are widely recognized in many cancers including Ewing's sarcoma (EWS). Copy number alterations through genomic gains and aneuploidy of chromosome 1 suggest the presence of loci responsible for EWS progression. We report here our investigation of mapping the region 1q32, which spans 4.2Mb and encompasses two candidate oncogenes that may contribute to EWS pathogenesis: KIF14 and MDM4. The genes encode proteins involved in the final phase of cytokinesis, in cell survival, and replicate early in the cell cycle. These findings suggest the presence of important proliferation-regulating genes on chromosome 1q implicated in driving progression of EWS. We hypothesize that secondary alterations of KIF14 and MDM4, their replication pattern, along with chromosome 1 aneuploidy, are associated with clinical parameters of progression. Multi - color interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on a tissue microarray (TMA) including 112 patient specimens using in house BAC probes for KIF14 and MDM4. Gain was defined by the presence of more than three hybridization signals per interphase nucleus with simultaneous intact centrosome signal occurring in more than 5% of nuclei. Aneuploidy was considered when the tumor cells exceeded the mean control +2 SD stage. We classified gene replication pattern as synchronous (SS, DD), or asynchronous (SD), according to the replication status of two homologous loci. Multiplet signals were analyzed when we observed clusters of more than 3 signals separated by less than one signal diameter. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS program. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. Copy numbers alterations were detected in 27/112 (24.1%) EWS patients. FISH analyses indicated 1q32 locus gain in 2/27 (7.4%), polysomy in 19/27 (70.4%) and 1q32 locus gain plus polysomy in 6/27 (22.2%). Disease-free survival analysis of the 1q32 gain plus aneuploidy of chromosome 1 versus only gain at 1q32 identified a shorter time interval in those patients that presented with 1q32 gain plus aneuploidy of chromosome 1 concurrently (p=0.04). Interestingly, univariate data analysis showed association with asynchronous gene replication pattern of KIF14 and polysomy (p=0.040) as well as tumor relapse (p=0.031). Furthermore, the multiplet replication pattern of MDM4 showed association with polysomy (p=0.014) and with poor clinical treatment response (p=0.045). It was noteworthy that in this cohort no statistically significant association was seen between treated and untreated groups. Genomic secondary alterations of 1q32 and simultaneous extra copies of chromosome 1 appear to define a small clinical subset of EWS patients with distinctly poor outcome. Significantly, the asynchronous gene replication pattern of KIF14 and MDM4 has potential prognostic value in stratifying of patients for risk, in which their corresponding products are possible therapeutic targets. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 326.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.348 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→