MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract B176: The correlation of clinicopathologic characteristics with oncogenic somatic mutations and Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) in vulvovaginal carcinoma.

2013· article· en· W2328609447 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aisling A. Clancy, Harmon Sekhon, Xu Ma, Jim Dimitroulakos, Glenwood D. Goss, Femina Kanji, Johanne I. Weberpals

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Therapeutics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKRASOncologyCancerInternal medicineCarcinomaPolymerase chain reactionSomatic cellCervical cancerBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Advanced and recurrent vulvovaginal squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC) is incurable and current treatment with radical surgery and chemotherapy is associated with significant morbidity. Consequently, there is an urgent need for less toxic, more effective targeted systemic therapy. This requires the identification of both prognostic and predictive biomarkers which will drive the selection of the appropriate therapy. Methods: This is a correlative study of the clinicopathologic characteristics of VSCC patients with tumor Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) status and frequently observed oncogenic somatic mutations. A retrospective review of a cohort of patients at the Ottawa Hospital from 2000 to 2012 is complete including demographics and pathology data. A molecular analysis of tissue samples is being done for HPV status by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using primers for the L1 region of HPV DNA. Detection of a panel of common somatic mutations (including BRAF, KRAS and EGFR) is being carried out by multiplexed targeted resequencing assay. Results: Following ethics approval, 81 eligible cases of VSCC were identified with pathologic samples available for analysis. Patient data includes demographic information and clinical outcomes. Forty-seven of the (81) patients had adequate DNA for molecular analysis and were included in the analysis. Samples were DNA-rich with a mean DNA concentration 169 ng/μL (SD 97 ng/μL). The median age at diagnosis was 64 (IQR 56-78) and did not differ between HPV-positive and HPV-negative groups. Overall, 22/47 patients (47%) were HPV-positive and 25/47 (53%) were HPV-negative. Tumor size (3.6±2.4 cm versus 3.9±2.7 cm), lymph node metastases (23% versus 33% with positive nodes) and depth of invasion (6.7±5.4mm versus 9.5±5.7 mm) were not statistically different between HPV-positive and HPV-negative groups respectively. Seventeen of 81 (21%) patients had died from disease, 4 (17%) in the HPV positive and 4 (17%) in the HPV negative groups. The mutational analysis of tumors from the 47 patients in whom DNA is available is ongoing and these results will be presented. Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort of patients, the incidence of death was unaffected by HPV status. DNA analysis for a mutational marker of prognosis is ongoing and may be determined by mutational aberrations rather than HPV status. Future study should focus on a molecular-targeted approach to the treatment of VSCC. Citation Information: Mol Cancer Ther 2013;12(11 Suppl):B176. Citation Format: Aisling Anne Clancy, Harmon Sekhon, Xu Ma, Jim Dimitroulakos, Glenwood Goss, Femina Kanji, Johanne Weberpals. The correlation of clinicopathologic characteristics with oncogenic somatic mutations and Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) in vulvovaginal carcinoma. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2013 Oct 19-23; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2013;12(11 Suppl):Abstract nr B176.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.304 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Cancer TherapeuticsSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207