MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P2-09-17: Evaluation of the oncomine comprehensive assay for the identification of actionable mutations for therapeutic stratification from the TEAM pathology cohort

2018· article· en· W2790762219 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Bayani, Cheryl Crozier, MA Quintayo, Yutaka Amemiya, X Zhang, M Larivière, Seth Sadis, JM Smith, Annette Hasenburg, D. G. Kieback, Christos Markopoulos, Luc Dirix, Martin J. Yaffe, Arun Seth, Harriet Feilotter, Daniel Rea, JMS Bartlett

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreQueen's UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoThermo Fisher Scientific (Canada)Ontario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineIon semiconductor sequencingOncologyInternal medicineComputational biologyTargeted therapyInformaticsBioinformaticsDNA sequencingCancerGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Large-scale sequencing initiatives have revealed a wealth of common and novel variants as well as copy-number aberrations, across different malignancies. This growing list of variants/aberrations can sometimes be matched to specific therapeutics. Such “actionable mutations/changes” hold promise for personalized treatment in the future, with treatments tailored to molecular abnormalities. Presently, women with hormone positive early breast cancer continue to experience improved survival on adjuvant anti-hormone therapy, but a significant number of women continue to progress. Therefore, there is a need to identify those women for whom current therapies are insufficient and to identify alternative therapeutic interventions. We explored the used of genetic profiling using a comprehensive solid tumor next generation sequencing (NGS) assay (the Oncomine Comprehensive Assay, OCA) to characterize early invasive breast cancer. The OCA is based on the Ion Torrent™ NGS platform and Ion AmpliSeq™ library preparation technology, coupled to the Oncomine™ Knowledgebase, for target selection, variant calling, and data annotations. The OCA includes 87 genes for hotspot mutation detection, 48 genes for full length sequencing and 43 genes for focal copy number assessment. The OCA provides a standardized informatics workflow and quality control (QC) parameters to process samples in a translational clinical research setting. To explore the application of the OCA to early invasive breast cancers, we performed a retrospective pilot study in a subset of cases from the TEAM trial. From the TEAM pathology samples, 420 were chosen in a case-control fashion, 413 samples were analyzed, 388 samples passed standard QC metrics, and 254 samples (65%) were found to contain 368 variants with Oncomine Knowledgebase annotations. Briefly, variants of PIK3CA were most frequent at 42.7% (157/368), followed by TP53 at 27.2% (100/368), PTEN at 5.7% (21/368), BRCA2 at 3.8% (14/368), SF3B1 (12/368), AKT1 (11/368) and PTCH1 (11/368) at 3.3%, 3.0%, 3.0%; respectively. Other variants were detected in ATM, ERBB2, RB1, FGFR2, NF1, CDKN2A, PIK3R1 and others. Amongst the 43 genes assessed for copy-number, 23 showed copy-number changes across 132 samples totalling 167 CNVs. 256 samples showed no copy-number alterations in any of the genes on the panel. ERBB2 was most frequently altered at 28.1% (47/167), followed by FGFR1 at 23.4% (39/167), CCND1 at 15.0% (25/167) and MDM2 at 10.2% (17/167). Copy-number losses were identified in TP53, RB1, PTEN, BRCA2 at 0.6% each; as well as CDKN2A at 1.8% (3/167). Analytical validation of a subset of gene variants and copy-number changes will be presented in addition to the evidence of potential future application of the Oncomine Comprehensive Assay to precision oncology goals. Citation Format: Bayani J, Crozier C, Quintayo MA, Amemiya Y, Zhang X, Larivière M, Sadis S, Smith JM, Hasenburg A, Kieback D, Markopoulos C, Dirix L, Yaffe M, Seth A, Feilotter H, Rea D, Bartlett JMS. Evaluation of the oncomine comprehensive assay for the identification of actionable mutations for therapeutic stratification from the TEAM pathology cohort [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-09-17.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→