A pan-cancer analysis of secreted Frizzled-related proteins: re-examining their proposed tumour suppressive function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Secreted frizzled-related proteins (SFRPs), containing five family members (SFRPs 1-5) are putative extracellular Wnt inhibitors. Given their abilities to inhibit Wnt signalling, as well as the loss of SFRP1 in many cancers, this family is generally considered to be tumour suppressive. In this study we analyzed gene expression, promoter methylation and survival data from over 8000 tumour and normal samples from 29 cancers in order to map the context-specific associations of SFRPs 1-5 with patient survival, gene silencing and gene expression signatures. We show that only SFRP1 associates consistently with tumour suppressive functions, and that SFRP2 and SFRP4 typically associate with a poor prognosis concomitant with the expression of genes associated with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. Moreover, our results indicate that while SFRP1 is lost in cancer cells via the process of DNA methylation, SFRP2 and 4 are likely derived from the tumour stroma, and thus tend to increase in tumours as compared to normal tissues. This in-depth analysis highlights the need to study each SFRP as a separate entity and suggests that SFRP2 and SFRP4 should be approached as complex matricellular proteins with functions that extend far beyond their putative Wnt antagonistic ability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".