MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract A28: Mutational landscape of TP53 in localized prostate cancer

2017· article· en· W2605172842 on OpenAlexaffabout
Osman Mahamud, Melvin L.K. Chua, S. Supiot, Emilie Lalonde, Alan Dal Pra, Alejandro Berlín, Michèle Orain, Valérie Picard, Hélène Hovington, Alain Bergeron, Yves Fradet, Bernard Têtu, Gaetano Zafarana, Alice Meng, Julie Livingstone, Melania Pintilie, Michael Fraser, Theodorus van der Kwast, Paul C. Boutros, Bristow G. Robert

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkHôtel-Dieu de QuébecOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversité LavalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerBiologyChromoplexyCopy-number variationDNA methylationCancer researchCopy number analysisContext (archaeology)GeneCancerGeneticsExome sequencingGenomeMutationPCA3Gene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: We performed a comprehensive interrogation of the mutational landscape of TP53 in the context of localized prostate cancer using a large clinical/molecular-paired dataset from the Canadian Prostate Cancer Gene Network (CPC-GENE). We further test the associations of TP53 mutations with outcomes post-image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) or radical prostatectomy (RadP). Methods: Copy number status (N = 284), single nucleotide variants (SNV) (N = 123), methylation status (N = 117), and mRNA abundance profiling (N = 115) were assessed using the Affymetrix Oncoscan FFPE express v3.0 assay, whole genome sequencing (up to 100-200x), Illumina 450K methylation array, and Affymetrix HuGene 2.0 array, respectively. Patient cohort comprised of NCCN-defined intermediate-risk prostate cancer who underwent either IGRT (N = 146) or RadP (N = 137). Biochemical-relapse free rate (bRFR) was assessed as the primary clinical end-point. Results: We identified 65 cases (22.9%) with mono-/bi-allelic copy number alteration (CNA) of TP53, and 7 cases (5.7%; 6 non-synonymous and 1 splice variant) with TP53 SNV in our cohort, which was comparable with the TCGA (30% CNA, 7% SNV) and MSKCC (17% CNA, 2.9% SNV) cohorts of low to high-risk localized prostate cancers. Epigenomic profiling revealed specific sites of DNA hypermethylation (β-value >0.7) within the body and 5' UTR gene-regions, while the TSS gene-region was unaffected. Genomic mutations (CNA and/or SNV) of TP53 were associated with global genomic instability (percent genome aberration of 9.5 vs 6.4, p = 0.001) and reduced mRNA levels (mRNA abundance Z-Score: -0.58 vs 0.22, p-value = 0.0011), but methylation status had no consequence on these indices. Neither TP53 genomic mutations (HR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.91-2.00, Wald's p = 0.14) nor mRNA abundance (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.71-2.75, Wald's p = 0.34) was associated with bRFR on multivariable analyses. However, stratification by combinatorial genomic and mRNA abundance indices identified an unfavorable subgroup that was associated with poorer bRFR on multivariable analysis (HR = 2.95, 95% CI 1.42-6.12, Wald's p = 0.004). Conclusions: This is the first comprehensive interrogation of the mutational landscape of TP53 in localized prostate cancer. Our findings suggest that functional TP53 loss at both the copy number and transcription level accounts for a subset of non-indolent localized prostate cancer. Citation Format: Osman Mahamud, Melvin L.K Chua, Stephane Supiot, Emilie Lalonde, Alan Dal Pra, Alejandro Berlin, Michèle Orain, Valerie Picard, Helene Hovington, Alain Bergeron, Yves Fradet, Bernard Têtu, Gaetano Zafarana, Alice Meng, Julie Livingstone, Melania Pintilie, Michael Fraser, Theodorus van der Kwast, Paul C. Boutros, Bristow G. Robert. Mutational landscape of TP53 in localized prostate cancer [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 A28.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.382 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Cancer ResearchSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207