MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586694861 · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-16-1045

Interaction Landscape of Inherited Polymorphisms with Somatic Events in Cancer

2017· article· en· W2586694861 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hannah Carter, Rachel Marty, Matan Hofree, Andrew M. Gross, James Jensen, Kathleen M. Fisch, Xingyu Wu, Christopher DeBoever, Eric L. Van Nostrand, Yan Song, Emily C. Wheeler, Jason F. Kreisberg, Scott M. Lippman, G Yeo, J. Silvio Gutkind, Trey Ideker

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Discovery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCentre Technologique des Résidus Industriels
KeywordsSomatic cellGermlineBiologyGermline mutationGeneticsPTENCancerGeneCancer researchMutationPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwaySignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent studies have characterized the extensive somatic alterations that arise during cancer. However, the somatic evolution of a tumor may be significantly affected by inherited polymorphisms carried in the germline. Here, we analyze genomic data for 5,954 tumors to reveal and systematically validate 412 genetic interactions between germline polymorphisms and major somatic events, including tumor formation in specific tissues and alteration of specific cancer genes. Among germline–somatic interactions, we found germline variants in RBFOX1 that increased incidence of SF3B1 somatic mutation by 8-fold via functional alterations in RNA splicing. Similarly, 19p13.3 variants were associated with a 4-fold increased likelihood of somatic mutations in PTEN. In support of this association, we found that PTEN knockdown sensitizes the MTOR pathway to high expression of the 19p13.3 gene GNA11. Finally, we observed that stratifying patients by germline polymorphisms exposed distinct somatic mutation landscapes, implicating new cancer genes. This study creates a validated resource of inherited variants that govern where and how cancer develops, opening avenues for prevention research. Significance: This study systematically identifies germline variants that directly affect tumor evolution, either by dramatically increasing alteration frequency of specific cancer genes or by influencing the site where a tumor develops. Cancer Discovery; 7(4); 410–23. ©2017 AACR. See related commentary by Geeleher and Huang, p. 354. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 339

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations158
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer DiscoverySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207