MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2530443495 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.575.575

Whole Exome Sequencing of Type 1 and Type 2 Enteropathy-Associated T Cell Lymphoma Reveals Genetic Basis of Eatl Oncogenesis

2015· article· en· W2530443495 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah L. Ondrejka, Andrea B. Moffitt, Eric Tse, Eric D. Hsi, John R. Goodlad, Rex Au-Yeung, Yok‐Lam Kwong, Gopesh Srivastava, Randy D. Gascoyne, Deepthi Rajagopalan, Cassandra Love, Sandeep S. Davé

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyExome sequencingExomeCDKN2ACarcinogenesisCancer researchCancerMutationOncologyGeneGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Enteropathy-associated T cell lymphoma (EATL) is an intestinal tumor of the intraepithelial T lymphocytes, with a median survival time of less than 1 year. It is a rare disease in general and has two main subtypes described. Type 1 EATL is a complication in patients with celiac disease, a chronic gluten-sensitive enteropathy. Type 2 EATL, characterized by smaller monomorphic lymphocytes, typically occurs sporadically in patients without celiac disease. Very little is known about the genetic mutations and gene expression signatures that define this disease, or the extent to which the two types of EATL are genetically distinct. It has been suggested that the two types of EATLs should be reclassified as separate diseases in future WHO categories. Methods In this study, we performed whole exome sequencing to 100-fold depth of 41 EATL tumors including 23 type 1 cases and 18 type 2 cases. Both alpha-beta (65%) and gamma-delta (35%) T cell receptor rearrangements were seen among these cases. Paired normal DNA was sequenced in most (N=30) cases. We defined somatic mutations, copy number alterations, and HLA genotypes in these cases from sequencing data. Additionally, we generated RNA sequencing data on the same EATL tumors. Corresponding clinical and outcome data was collected on the same cohort. Results We found that both type 1 and type 2 EATLs had overlapping patterns of mutations and similar overall survival. The most commonly mutated genes were chromatin modifier genes (34%) including ATRX and ARID1B. We also identified recurrent somatic mutations in signal transduction genes, including JAK1 and BCL9L. TP53 mutations were also recurrent (12%). Copy number amplifications in 9q, 1q, and 8q occurred most frequently and were present in both subtypes. We further compared the mutational profiles to peripheral T cell lymphoma, angioimmunoblastic T cell lymphoma, cutaneous T cell lymphoma, natural killer/T cell lymphoma, diffuse large B cell lymphoma, and Burkitt lymphoma. These comparisons identify EATL as a genetically distinct disease with a very different pattern of mutations. RNAseq identified the gene expression patterns that are unique to EATL and also identified gene expression signatures that distinguish the two types of EATL. The DQ2 or DQ8 HLA genotype is present in the majority of type 1 cases (73%) while occurring infrequently in type 2 cases (27%). Conclusions Our study defines the genetic landscape of enteropathy associated T cell lymphoma and highlights the genetic and clinical overlap between the two types. While the two types have differences in mutations and gene expression patterns, they have more in common with each other compared to other lymphoma types. Our data may inform future decisions regarding the potential separation of the two EATL types as distinct entities. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer→French-language works237,207→