MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771972433 · doi:10.24870/cjb.2017-a231

Comparing genomic landscape of early stage, treatment naïve and late stage, drug resistant EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinomas

2017· article· en· W2771972433 on OpenAlex
Rahul Nahar, Yin Yeng Lee, Alexis Jiaying Khng, Tong Zhang, Angela Takano, Xingliang Liu, Jacob J.S. Alvarez, Ori Zelichov, Ezra Ella, Zohar Barbash, Chong Hee Lim, Tina Koh, Zaw Win Aung, Tony Kiat Hon Lim, Chee‐Keong Toh, Wan‐Teck Lim, Bing Lim, Wai Leong Tam, Eng‐Huat Tan, Weiwei Zhai, Daniel S.W. Tan, Axel M. Hillmer

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Biotechnology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)MutantAdenocarcinomaOncologyDrugLungCancer researchInternal medicineBiologyMedicinePharmacologyGeneCancerGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While, the genomic landscape of early stage, treatment nave lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs) has been described quite elaborately in recent literature, the genomic profile of late stage, drug resistant tumors remains largely unknown. Further, most of the published studies are based on smoker dominated Caucasian cohorts and EGFR-mutant LUAD remains under-represented in them. Despite response rates of upto 70% to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), resistance ensues in most of these EGFRmutant patients, limiting responses to a median of 10-12 months. Thus, to better understand the evolution of these tumors in context of drug resistance, we perform a comparative analysis of the mutational and copy number landscape of early stage, treatment nave vs late stage, resistant tumors. Whole exome sequencing was performed on: (i) 100 tumor sectors from 24 early stage, treatment nave EGFR-mutant LUAD cases. (ii) 81 biopsies from 58 late stage, TKI and chemotherapy resistant cases. Copy number analysis using SNP arrays was performed for a subset of these patients. The significantly higher mutation burden in the late stage, drug resistant tumors elucidated a driver mutation landscape beyond just recurrent TP53 mutations, which was dominated by PIK3CA (14%), RB1 (10%), NF1 (7%) and other rare mutations in EGFR (in 5/58 cases), many of which cooccurred with the T790M mutation. Functional studies validated the oncogenicity of some of these rare mutations in the PI3K/AKT1 pathway. The copy number landscape revealed pervasive, truncal genome doubling events in both cohorts (~80% cases). While comparable fraction of genome was affected by overall copy number gains or losses (copy change >=1) across the two cohorts (49.2% vs 46.3%, P=0.51), significantly higher fraction of genome was affected by amplifications (copy change >=2; 8.7% vs 5%, P=0.02) and loss of heterozygosity (LOH; 33.1% vs 20.6%, P=0.003) in the drug resistant tumors compared to the treatment naive tumors. In summary, our study reveals (i) increased mutation and driver burden with co-occurring resistance

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.266 · 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