MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Copy-number and targeted sequencing analyses to identify distinct prognostic groups: Implications for patient selection to targeted therapies amongst anti-endocrine therapy resistant early breast cancers.

2017· article· en· W2624627283 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Bayani, Elizabeth Kornaga, Cheryl Crozier, Gun Ho Jang, Irina Kalatskaya, Quang M. Trinh, Cindy Q. Yao, Julie Livingstone, Annette Hasenburg, D. G. Kieback, Christos Markopoulos, Luc Dirix, Paul C. Boutros, Melanie Spears, Lincoln Stein, Daniel Rea, John M.S. Bartlett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncologyBreast cancerPTENCopy-number variationCopy number analysisHazard ratioInternal medicineContext (archaeology)Targeted therapyCDKN2ACancerGNAS complex locusBioinformaticsGenePI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayBiologyGeneticsConfidence intervalGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

524 Background: Hormone receptor positive breast cancer is a therapeutic challenge. Despite optimal anti-endocrine therapies, most breast cancer deaths follow a diagnosis of early luminal cancer. To understand the impact of multiple aberrations in the context of current therapy, we assessed the prognostic ability of genomic signatures as a putative stratification tool to targeted therapies. Methods: This a priori study is based on molecular pathways which might predict response to targeted therapies. DNA from 420 patients from the phase III TEAM pathology cohort were used. Patients with a distant recurrence within 5 years were matched by clinical variables to those disease-free at follow up. Copy number analysis was performed using the Affymetrix Oncoscan Assay. Targeted sequencing was performed in a subset of samples for genes based on signaling cassettes mined from the ICGC. Pathways were identified as aberrant if there were copy number variations (CNVs) and/or mutations in any of the pre-determined pathway genes: 1) CCND1/CCND2/CCND3/CDK4/CDK6; 2) FGFR1/FGFR2/FGFR2/FGFR4; and 3) AKT1/AKT2/PIK3CA/PTEN. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used for DFS between groups. Hazard ratios were calculated using the Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, tumour size, grade, lymph node and HER2 status. Results: 390/420 samples passed informatics QC filters. For the CCND/CDK pathway, patients with no CNV changes experienced a better DFS (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.3, p < 0.001). For the FGFR/FGF pathway, a similar outcome is seen among patients without CNVs (HR = 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0; p = 0.005). For AKT/PIK3CA, a decrease in DFS was seen in those with aberrations (HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.8, p = 0.03). Conclusions: We demonstrated that CNVs of genes within CDK4/CCND, PIK3CA/AKT and FGFR pathways are independently linked to high risk of relapse following endocrine treatment, with implications for identifying those patients who are at high-risk for recurrence despite optimal anti-endocrine therapy and linking molecular features driving these cancers to targeted therapies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.370 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207