CMS-dependent prognostic impact of KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in primary colorectal cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The prognostic impact of KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in primary colorectal cancer (CRC) varies with microsatellite instability (MSI) status. The gene expression-based consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) of CRC define molecularly and clinically distinct subgroups, and represent a novel stratification framework in biomarker analysis. We investigated the prognostic value of these mutations within the CMS groups. Patients and methods: Totally 1197 primary tumors from a Norwegian series of CRC stage I-IV were analyzed for MSI and mutation status in hotspots in KRAS (codons 12, 13 and 61) and BRAF (codon 600). A subset was analyzed for gene expression and confident CMS classification was obtained for 317 samples. This cohort was expanded with clinical and molecular data, including CMS classification, from 514 patients in the publically available dataset GSE39582. Gene expression signatures associated with KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations were used to evaluate differential impact of mutations on gene expression among the CMS groups. Results: BRAFV600E and KRAS mutations were both associated with inferior 5-year overall survival (OS) exclusively in MSS tumors (BRAFV600E mutation versus KRAS/BRAF wild-type: Hazard ratio (HR) 2.85, P < 0.001; KRAS mutation versus KRAS/BRAF wild-type: HR 1.30, P = 0.013). BRAFV600E-mutated MSS tumors were strongly enriched and associated with metastatic disease in CMS1, leading to negative prognostic impact in this subtype (OS: BRAFV600E mutation versus wild-type: HR 7.73, P = 0.001). In contrast, the poor prognosis of KRAS mutations was limited to MSS tumors with CMS2/CMS3 epithelial-like gene expression profiles (OS: KRAS mutation versus wild-type: HR 1.51, P = 0.011). The subtype-specific prognostic associations were substantiated by differential effects of BRAFV600E and KRAS mutations on gene expression signatures according to the MSI status and CMS group. Conclusions: BRAFV600E mutations are enriched and associated with metastatic disease in CMS1 MSS tumors, leading to poor prognosis in this subtype. KRAS mutations are associated with adverse outcome in epithelial (CMS2/CMS3) MSS tumors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".