MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract A21: Enhancing chemotherapeutic responses in CNS malignancy through suppression of hyperactive DNA damage repair pathways

2017· article· en· W2604886625 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marina Mostafizar, Sachin Katyal

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA repairCancer researchDNA damageBiologyPoly ADP ribose polymeraseSynthetic lethalityMedulloblastomaCancerDNAPolymeraseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: We are targeting DNA repair pathways to enhance existing chemoradiotherapeutic strategies against medulloblastoma (MB) and malignant glioma (MG), two highly invasive tumors of the central nervous system (CNS). Current methods to treat childhood medulloblastoma are highly intrusive and lead to poor quality of life while the three-year survival rate of patients afflicted with malignant glioma remains abysmal (<5%). Recurrence of these exceedingly malignant tumors is pervasive as they can adopt several mechanisms to resist anti-cancer therapeutics including activation and up-regulation of DNA repair pathways that act to resolve DNA damage elicited by radiation and chemotherapeutic agents (chemo-radiotherapy). DNA repair inhibitors like Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase (PARPi), DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PKi) and Ataxia Telengiectasia Mutated (ATMi) have shown promise to sensitize tumors to DNA damaging chemo-radiotherapeutics as these inhibitors specifically target single yet highly critical DNA repair response pathway enzymes. In combination with anti-tumor agents, these sensitizers can significantly augment anti-cancer therapeutic success. However, differing tumors have variable expression/activity of these enzymes and their corresponding repair pathway(s), therefore; their identification, characterization and the development of strategies to modulate their expression can enhance current anti-tumor treatment efficacy. Methods: I will identify specific differentially-regulated DNA repair enzymes/pathways by gene expression methodology. From these findings, I will inhibit these DNA repair enzymes via shRNA or enzyme-specific inhibitors (if available), to chemosensitize MB and MG cells to DNA damaging therapeutics in an effort to reduce DNA repair in these cells thereby boosting tumor genotoxicity and cell death. Extent of DNA damage will be measured using novel high-throughput DNA repair assays combined with unique cellular DNA damage reporters/sensors to facilitate these studies. Results: In comparing subsets of MB and MG cell lines with existing DNA repair inhibitors, I have found differing DNA repair pathways as potential targets to sensitize these CNS tumors to chemo-radiotherapeutics. MB cells rely on DNA-PK/SSBR (single strand break repair) dependent pathways to resolve induced genotoxicity, while MG utilizes the ATM/SSBR pathways. My focus is now to expand this dataset in additional pertinent tumors and to perform a detailed comparative analysis to identify specific highly active tumor-specific DNA repair enzymes with which to target in order to enhance tumor cell death. These include the use of DNA damage repair response PCR arrays to compare the expression levels of individual DNA repair enzyme/pathway members amongst these CNS tumors. Conclusion: I have identified unique DNA repair enzymes, which may mediate specific differential chemo-radioresistant phenotypes in MB and MG. An expanded analysis is currently underway to further differentiate DNA repair mechanisms and therapeutic responses between these two brain tumor types. I hope to translate these findings into pre-clinical models whereby my data may lead to identifying next-generation brain cancer treatments with improved patient survival and quality-of-life. Citation Format: Marina Mostafizar, Sachin Katyal. Enhancing chemotherapeutic responses in CNS malignancy through suppression of hyperactive DNA damage repair pathways [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on DNA Repair: Tumor Development and Therapeutic Response; 2016 Nov 2-5; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Res 2017;15(4_Suppl):Abstract nr A21.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Cancer ResearchSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207