MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P2-07-01: BRCA1 regulates RHAMM function in breast cancer

2012· article· en· W2326407947 on OpenAlexaff
M Fleisch, Ying Yang, Qiang Mei, F Sadat, L Brandi, KM Iwaniuk, Ellen Honisch, CA Maxwell, Dieter Niederacher

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfectionCancer researchBiologyMolecular biologyCell cultureCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives: The receptor for hyaluronan-mediated motility (RHAMM, intracellular hyaluronan binding protein [IHABP], CD168), whose over-expression in tumors is associated with poor prognosis and early age at diagnosis, localizes to the centrosome, interacts with microtubules, functions in the maintenance of spindle pole stability and is required for centrosomal targeting. A previous study has shown that genetic variation at the HMMR locus (encoding for RHAMM) modifies breast cancer risk among BRCA1 mutation carriers and interplay between BRCA1, AURKA (aurora kinase A), RHAMM and phosphorylated RHAMM (pRHAMM) plays an important role in epithelial apicobasal polarization and breast carcinogenesis. Aim of this study was to investigate mechanisms by which BRCA1 regulates the function of RHAMM. Methods: Four pairs of shBRCA1 oligonucleotides containing target sequences against BRCA1 transcript were designed and synthesized. After annealing, these four double-strand shBRCA1 fragments were inserted into pLVTH vector and stably transfected into MCF-12A cells for knock-down of BRCA1 expression. The BRCA1 knock-out breast cancer cell line HCC1937 with homozygous BRCA1 c.5382insC mutation was transfected with the full length wt-BRCA1 to restore BRCA1 function. HCC1937 cells were also transfected with the BRCA1-delExon11 isoform that lacks BRCA1 exon 11 in its entirety. Western blotting analysis and immunohistochemical staining with anti-BRCA1, anti-RHAMM, anti-pRHAMM and anti-AURKA antibodies were performed. Real-time PCR was used to quantify RHAMM and AURKA expression in these different cell lines and transfectants. Results: Stable transfection of MCF-12A cells with the different shRNAs resulted in a significant decrease of BRCA1 transcript and protein levels. Real-time PCR showed increased RHAMM expression in MCF-12A cells transfected with shRNA BRCA1 knock-down constructs. Increased RHAMM gene expression was also determined in HCC1937 cells lacking BRCA1 function due to homozygous deleterious BRCA1 mutation c.5382insC. Restored wt-BRCA1 expression in HCC1937 cells transfected with the full length BRCA1 cDNA results in was significantly reduced RHAMM expression. Inhibition of RHAMM gene expression was even more pronounced in HCC1937 cells transfected with the BRCA1-delExon11variant lacking 1,143 amino acids of the BRCA1 protein. On the protein level loss of BRCA1 function affects nuclear localization of pT703-RHAMM the product of AURKA activity: pT703-RHAMM staining was revealed to be strong at the nuclear envelope in MCF12A BRCA1 knock-down transfectants compared to the homogenous and less intense but clearly nuclear pT703-RHAMM staining in MCF12A wt-BRCA1 cells. Conclusions: BRCA1 negatively regulates RHAMM gene expression and might be involved in the nuclear localization of pRHAMM. Interestingly on the transcription level the BRCA1delexon11 isoform of BRCA1 displayed a stronger RHAMM repressor function than BRCA1 wild type. Taken together, our data provide insight into new functions of BRCA1 regulating RHAMM expression and mediating pRHAMM function. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-07-01.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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)0.0070.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.340 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207