MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract LB-257: Estrogen signaling in mature luminal and luminal progenitor cells of BRCA2 carriers and non-carriers

2017· article· en· W2740934573 on OpenAlexaff
Hari Singhal, David Chi, Elgene Lim, Housheng He, Raga Vadhi, Prakash K. Rao, Henry W. Long, Andrea L. Richardson, Judy E. Garber, Myles Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgenitor cellBiologyCancer researchBreast cancerEstrogen receptorTranscriptomePopulationCancerStem cellCell biologyGene expressionGeneticsGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Carriers of mutations in the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2 have a 50-80% lifetime risk of developing breast cancers, about 70% of which are positive for estrogen receptor (ER), a key oncogenic hormone receptor. Metastatic ER+ tumors also respond to PARP inhibitors associated with their DNA repair defect. There remains much to understand regarding estrogen signaling in BRCA2 carriers and preventing cancers in this high-risk population. Methods: We studied the transcriptomes and in-vitro growth of luminal progenitors and mature luminal cells derived from primary human normal breast tissue obtained from BRCA2 carriers and wild-type patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomy and reduction mammoplasty procedures, respectively. Subsequently, formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissue samples from twelve case-control matched pairs of BRCA2 carriers and wild-type patients were investigated for ER genomic binding, H3K27Ac enhancer marks, and gene expression changes. Results: Luminal progenitors and mature luminal cells have different gene expression patterns. Unsupervised clustering of transcriptomes from normal tissue of three pairs of BRCA2-mutant and wildtype patients suggested that BRCA2 mutation status can segregate transcriptomes from luminal progenitors but not mature luminal cells. These differential transcriptomes in luminal progenitor cells from BRCA2 carriers were enriched for cell proliferation genes. In agreement, greater proliferative phenotype was observed in BRCA2-mutant luminal progenitor cells in comparison to the wild-type cohort. Interestingly, clustering analyses of twelve pairs of breast tumors indicated no clear differences between ER cistromes, enhancer marks and gene expression between BRCA2 carriers and wildtype patients. Because luminal progenitor cells are more likely to contribute to tumorigenesis, we hypothesize that the identified BRCA2-mutant signature in normal progenitor cells could be retained in tumors obtained from BRCA2 carriers. Conclusions: There are differential gene expression patterns between luminal progenitors and mature luminal cells obtained from normal human breast tissue. The transcriptomes in the luminal progenitor but not mature luminal cells segregate differently based on the BRCA2 mutation status. This identified BRCA2-mutant gene signature in luminal progenitor cells is enriched for pro-proliferation pathways, and BRCA2-mutant luminal progenitor cells exhibit higher cell proliferation, suggesting a potential cell-of-origin in BRCA2-associated breast cancers. Importantly, no significant differences in transcriptomes and ER cistromes are observed in breast tumors from BRCA2 carriers and non-carriers, indicating a need to identify BRCA2-mutant gene signature that may assist in segregating ER+ breast cancers in this high-risk populations. The knowledge from this study may assist in pioneering strategies for cancer prevention in high-risk BRCA2 mutation carriers. Citation Format: Hari Singhal, David Chi, Elgene Lim, Housheng He, Raga Vadhi, Prakash K. Rao, Henry W. Long, Andrea L. Richardson, Judy Garber, Myles Brown. Estrogen signaling in mature luminal and luminal progenitor cells of BRCA2 carriers and non-carriers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-257. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-LB-257

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→