MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561130337 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-1952

A Case-Matched Gender Comparison Transcriptomic Screen Identifies eIF4E and eIF5 as Potential Prognostic Markers in Male Breast Cancer

2016· article· en· W2561130337 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMedical Research CouncilCancerfondenUniversity of LeedsBreast Cancer Research TrustBreast Cancer Campaign
KeywordsBreast cancerTranscriptomeOncologyMedicineCancerBiologyInternal medicineCancer researchGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Breast cancer affects both genders, but is understudied in men. Although still rare, male breast cancer (MBC) is being diagnosed more frequently. Treatments are wholly informed by clinical studies conducted in women, based on assumptions that underlying biology is similar. Experimental Design: A transcriptomic investigation of male and female breast cancer was performed, confirming transcriptomic data in silico. Biomarkers were immunohistochemically assessed in 697 MBCs (n = 477, training; n = 220, validation set) and quantified in pre- and posttreatment samples from an MBC patient receiving everolimus and PI3K/mTOR inhibitor. Results: Gender-specific gene expression patterns were identified. eIF transcripts were upregulated in MBC. eIF4E and eIF5 were negatively prognostic for overall survival alone (log-rank P = 0.013; HR = 1.77, 1.12–2.8 and P = 0.035; HR = 1.68, 1.03–2.74, respectively), or when coexpressed (P = 0.01; HR = 2.66, 1.26–5.63), confirmed in the validation set. This remained upon multivariate Cox regression analysis [eIF4E P = 0.016; HR = 2.38 (1.18–4.8), eIF5 P = 0.022; HR = 2.55 (1.14–5.7); coexpression P = 0.001; HR = 7.04 (2.22–22.26)]. Marked reduction in eIF4E and eIF5 expression was seen post BEZ235/everolimus, with extended survival. Conclusions: Translational initiation pathway inhibition could be of clinical utility in MBC patients overexpressing eIF4E and eIF5. With mTOR inhibitors that target this pathway now in the clinic, these biomarkers may represent new targets for therapeutic intervention, although further independent validation is required. Clin Cancer Res; 23(10); 2575–83. ©2016 AACR.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.280 · 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