MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The impact of PBRM1 and BAP1 expression on outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with VEGF-targeted therapy (TT).

2016· article· en· W2589234634 on OpenAlexaff
André P. Fay, Guillermo de Velasco, Kathryn P. Gray, Thai H. Ho, Jiaxi Song, Payal Kapur, Laurence Albigès, David F. McDermott, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, James Brugarolas, Toni K. Choueiri, Sabina Signoretti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBAP1MedicineRenal cell carcinomaInternal medicineOncologyImmunohistochemistryClear cell renal cell carcinomaPathologicalGastroenterologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

616 Background: Polybromo-1 (PBRM1) and BRCA1 associated protein-1 (BAP1) are genes commonly mutated in clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and have been associated with clinical outcome. This work aims to evaluate the impact of PBRM1 and BAP1 expression by IHC in mRCC patients treated with VEGF-TT. Methods: PBRM1 and BAP1 expression was evaluated by IHC in a TMA including 146 mRCC patients. PBRM1 and BAP1 IHC scores were dichotomized as a binary variable: negative (-) or positive (+) (weak positivity was excluded). The associations of PBRM1 or BAP1 expression with baseline clinico-pathological characteristics were evaluated, as well as with overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) usingCox proportional hazards models. Results: Out of 146 patients, 116 and 109 samples had available results for PBRM1 and BAP1 staining, respectively. Overall, 90% (n = 131) patients had ccRCC. 70/116 samples (60%) were PBRM1- and 26/109 patients (24%) were BAP1-. Only 12% (n = 13) of patients had simultaneous negative PBRM1 and BAP1. While there was no association between PBRM1 expression status and clinical factors, BAP1- samples were associated with poor IMDC prognostic risk score (p = 0.004) and higher Fuhrman grade (p = 0.012). PBRM1+ patients showed a trend towards an increased risk of death and a shorter TTF compared to PBRM1- patients (OS: HR = 1.38, 95%CI: 0.92-2.07, p = 0.1; TTF: HR = 1.39, 95%CI: 0.94-2.06, p = 0.1). BAP1 expression was not independently associated with OS or TTF. Conclusions: Loss of PBRM1, but not BAP1 expression showed a trend towards longer TTF and OS in mRCC patients treated with VEGF-TT.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→