MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2334242376 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-2089

Molecular differences in triple negative breast cancer between race/ethnicities.

2009· article· en· W2334242376 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Bouzyk, BG Barwick, Mark Abramovitz, Maja Kodani, Gabriela Oprea, Charles Catzavelos, Wenbin Tang, CS Moreno, B Leyland-Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerSignificance analysis of microarraysCohortRNA extractionGene expressionDownregulation and upregulationOncologyCancerGeneTissue microarrayMicroarrayBiologyFold changeMedicineCancer researchMolecular biologyInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract #2089 Background: A disparity in prognosis of triple negative (TN) breast cancer (BC) has been observed between African American (AA) and Caucasian (CAU) race/ethnicities afflicted with this aggressive and invasive BC subtype. Etiological understanding of these differences involves accounting for several factors associated with phenotype and genotype. Here, we address the latter using the Illumina DASL (cDNA mediated, Annealing, Selection, Extension, and Ligation) assay to quantify mRNA expression of 512 breast cancer related genes in a cohort of 24 CAU and 56 AA TN BC tissues sourced from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks. Material and Methods: The DASL assay was used to measure mRNA expression levels from FFPE sourced tissues in both cohorts of self-identified patients. CAU BC patients were obtained from St. Mary's Hospital, Montreal, Quebec and AA BC patients were obtained from Grady Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia. RNA extraction used the RNA High Pure Kit (Roche) and was taken from archival FFPE tissues either 5µm tissue sections or cores. Differential mRNA regulation was identified by Significance Analysis of Microarrays (SAM) software using a false discover rate (FDR) less than 1% and a two fold-change criteria to determine differential regulation. Results: In all, 33 genes were found differentially expressed between AA and CAU TN BC tumor samples, 32 of which were upregulated in the AA cohort, only 1 of which was upregulated in the CAU group. The upregulated gene in CAU TN BC was TFF1. Upregulated genes in the AA cohort (order of statistical significance according to SAM software) were KIF20A, EP300, AURKB, FGF4, C14orf155, USP22, EPOR, ZNF668, SCNN1G, MAPT, FLNB, EP400, LTA, ACOT11, RBP3, CSF3, E2F2, TGFB1, CCNE1, L1CAM, NDP, VWF, RHOB, FEN1, BIN1, KRT17, CDC42EP4, SERPINF1, CHI3L2, NES, BCL2, and RERG. Discussion: TFF1 upregulated in the CAU population, has been indicated as biomarker of favorable prognosis in endocrine therapy in clinical studies which is consistent with race/ethnicity disparities. The remaining genes upregulated in the AA cohort include transcription factors E2F2 and RBP3/E2F1 both with cyclin binding domains which may interact with CCNE1, extracellular and adhesion related genes KRT17, L1CAM and FGF4, genes associated with cell cycle AURKB, EP400, and EP300 (activator of HIF-1A). Several RAS related genes were also found differentially expressed in the AA cohort including RHOB, RERG, BIN1, and EPOR. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that BCL2 which is expressed in the aggressive mammary cancer cell line MCF-7 was also found upregulated in the AA cohort. These initial findings suggest that several differentially regulated genes between AA and CAU race/ethnicities may account for the disparity in outcomes resultant in these populations. These initial data warrant further investigation which is currently ongoing. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 2089.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.358 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→