MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498107391 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2016-2512

Abstract 2512: Bmi1 identifies treatment-refractory stem cells in human glioblastoma

2016· article· en· W2498107391 on OpenAlexaff
Parvez Vora, Maleeha Qazi, Chitra Venugopal, Minomi Subapanditha, Sujeivan Mahendram, Chirayu Chokshi, Mohini Singh, David Bakhshinyan, Nicole McFarlane, Sheila K. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBMI1TemozolomideCancer researchChemoradiotherapyStem cellBiologyStem cell markerProgenitor cellBrain tumorCancer stem cellRadiation therapyGliomaMedicinePathologyInternal medicineCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive and fatal primary adult brain tumor. Even with surgery, chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ), and radiation, tumor re-growth and patient relapse are inevitable. Brain tumor initiating cells (BTICs), a rare subset of GBM cells with stem cell properties, were shown to be both chemo- and radio-resistant. We hypothesize that these treatment-resistant BTICs cause tumor relapse and a subset of neural stem cell genes regulate BTIC self-renewal, driving GBM recurrence. Using patient-derived primary GBM samples, we designed an in vitro model of tumor recurrence by treating cells with TMZ and radiation. We also adapted the existing treatment protocol for adults with primary GBM for in vivo treatment of immunocompromised mice engrafted with GFP+ GBM cells. Post-chemoradiotherapy, GFP+ cells were recovered from mouse brains and profiled for self-renewal, proliferation and mRNA expression of important stem cell genes. Using in vitro and in vivo gain-of-function/loss-of-function experiments, we investigated the regulatory functions of Bmi1 in primary neural stem & progenitor cells (NSPCs) and GBM tumor formation. To understand the consequences of Bmi1 dysregulation on target gene expression, we performed global RNA-seq profiling on NSPCs and GBMs. GBM cells showed an increase in Bmi1 levels post-chemoradiotherapy, suggesting the presence of a treatment-refractory BTICs. GFP+ cells extracted from chemoradiotherapy treated human tumor xenografts showed increased self-renewal and elevated BTIC marker expression. Although treated mice responded to therapy with decreased tumor size, we observed tumor relapse post-chemoradiotherapy with increased Bmi1 protein expression. Knockdown of Bmi1 diminished self-renewal and proliferation of GBM cells and delayed tumorigenesis in xenografted mice, highlighting a critical role for Bmi1 in tumor initiation and maintenance. Conversely, over-expressing Bmi1 in NSPCs induced stem cell properties in vitro, but failed to initiate tumor formation in vivo. Using high-throughput sequencing data, we generated a map of signaling pathways dysregulated in GBM that may lead to tumor recurrence. Our data confirms the existence of a rare treatment-refractory BTICs population that escapes therapy, and drives tumor relapse and recurrence with enhanced self-renewal capacity. Our human BTIC in vitro assays and human-mouse BTIC xenograft model provide fundamental tools to characterize the functional relevance and of key stem cell self-renewal genes in GBM recurrence. Citation Format: Parvez Vora, Maleeha Qazi, Chitra Venugopal, Minomi Subapanditha, Sujeivan Mahendram, Chirayu Chokshi, Mohini Singh, David Bakhshinyan, Nicole McFarlane, Sheila Singh. Bmi1 identifies treatment-refractory stem cells in human glioblastoma. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 2512.

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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207