MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2563723783 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.panca16-b87

Abstract B87: Co-expression of GLUT1 and MCT4 is a poor prognostic marker and predicts response to adjuvant chemotherapy in PDAC

2016· article· en· W2563723783 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna M. Karasinska, Steve E. Kalloger, Hui‐Li Wong, Taixiang Wang, Daniel J. Renouf, David F. Schaeffer

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalBC Cancer AgencyPancreas Centre (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGLUT1ImmunohistochemistryKRASTissue microarrayInternal medicineMedicineGlucose transporterStainingCancer researchCancerPathologyOncologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Mutant KRAS stimulates glucose uptake and lactate production in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), contributing to metabolic pathway reprogramming and tumor progression. A prognostic effect for glucose transporter GLUT1 and lactate transporter MCT4 expression in PDAC has been demonstrated but it is not known if the expression of markers of glycolytic and lactate metabolism pathways is predictive of treatment response. We aimed to validate the prognostic and assess the predictive effects of GLUT1 and MCT4 protein levels in resectable PDAC. Methods: Immunohistochemical analysis for GLUT1 and MCT4 was performed on a tissue microarray (TMA) comprising 261 resected PDAC tumors with associated clinical outcome data. The expression of GLUT1 and MCT4 in the epithelial compartment of PDAC was quantified and patient samples were scored as low (negative and weak staining) and high (moderate and strong staining) expression groups. Univariable disease-specific survival (DSS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 70% (182) of the patients included in the TMA had high GLUT1 staining and 58% had high MCT4 staining. GLUT1high patients had reduced median DSS compared to GLUT1low patients (1.34 vs. 2.05 years, p=0.0136). Median DSS was also reduced in the MCT4high group (1.33 vs. 1.91 years in MCT4low, p=0.0153). There was a significant co-occurrence of high GLUT1 with high MCT4 expression (70%, p<0.0001). GLUT1highMCT4high patients had reduced DSS (N=124, 1.21 years, p=0.0114) compared to GLUT1lowMCT4low (N=55, 2.04 years), GLUT1lowMCT4high (N=27, 2.12 years) and GLUT1highMCT4low (N=61, 1.85 years). 31% of all patients received adjuvant single agent chemotherapy with a pyrimidine analog. Two of the combined GLUT1/MCT4 phenotypes were found to be predictive biomarkers for adjuvant chemotherapy. GLUT1lowMCT4low showed a treatment associated two year increase in median DSS (3.32 vs. 1.38 years, p=0.0020) and GLUT1highMCT4high demonstrated a treatment associated 10 month increase in median DSS (1.68 vs. 0.89 years, p=0.0071) compared to no adjuvant therapy. No significant treatment related differences were observed in either the GLUT1lowMCT4high (p=0.24) or GLUT1highMCT4low groups (p=0.95). Conclusions: GLUT1 and MCT4 expression are poor prognostic markers in PDAC and co-expression of these biomarkers enhances this effect. Neither GLUT1 nor MCT4 were found to be of predictive relevance when considered individually. Patients with low tumor GLUT1 and MCT4 expression had the best outcomes with chemotherapy with a pyrimidine analog. Hence, immunohistochemical analysis of GLUT1 and MCT4 in resected PDAC defines patient subgroups with different survival prognosis and predicted sensitivity to pyrimidine analog chemotherapy. The combined effect of GLUT1 and MCT4 expression on PDAC outcome suggests that therapeutic agents which can alter the glycolytic/lactate pathway may have potential for increasing sensitivity to treatment. Citation Format: Joanna M. Karasinska, Steve E. Kalloger, Hui-li Wong, Taixiang Wang, Daniel J. Renouf, David F. Schaeffer.{Authors}. Co-expression of GLUT1 and MCT4 is a poor prognostic marker and predicts response to adjuvant chemotherapy in PDAC. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer: Advances in Science and Clinical Care; 2016 May 12-15; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(24 Suppl):Abstract nr B87.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.380 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→