MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2887130112 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2018-4237

Abstract 4237: Differences in the frequencies of tumor <i>VHL</i> mutation and HIF-2α expression between black and white patients with clear cell renal carcinoma

2018· article· en· W2887130112 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine L. Callahan, Lee E. Moore, Petra H. Lenz, Kendra Schwartz, Julie J. Ruterbusch, Faith Davis, W. Chow, W. Marston Linehan, Maria J. Merino, Stephen M. Hewitt, Nathaniel Rothman, Jonathan N. Hofmann, Michael L. Nickerson, Mark P. Purdue

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerRenal cell carcinomaClear cell renal cell carcinomaImmunohistochemistryKidney cancerInternal medicineOncologyKidney diseasePathologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Black Americans have a poorer prognosis for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) than white Americans, potentially due in part to differences in tumor biology. In a recent analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), tumors from black ccRCC patients had a lower rate of mutation in the VHL tumor suppressor gene and lower expression of hypoxia inducible factors (HIF) than tumors from white ccRCC patients. However, as this study was based on a small number of black patients (N=19) and had limited information on patients' medical histories and risk factors profiles, further investigation is needed. Objective: We evaluated differences in the frequencies of somatic VHL gene mutations and HIF-1α and -2α protein expression between tumors from black and white ccRCC patients. Methods: The investigation utilized formalin-fixed tissue and data collected from patients participating in a case-control study conducted in Chicago and Detroit. We sequenced VHL using the Ion Torrent platform for tumors from 69 black and 98 white patients, and measured tumor HIF-1α and -2α protein expression for 88 black and 240 white patients using immunohistochemistry. Results: Black patients' tumors had a lower frequency of VHL mutation than those of white patients (32% vs. 49%; P = 0.03) as well as a lower frequency of above-median HIF-2α expression (33% vs. 56%; P=0.002). HIF-1α expression did not differ by race (P=0.14). These racial differences persisted after multivariable model adjustment for age, sex, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, body mass index, smoking status, stage, grade, and tumor size [VHL mutation: odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.19, 0.98; HIF-2α expression: OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.18, 0.61]. Conclusions: Our observation that VHL mutation and high HIF-2α expression are less frequent in ccRCC tumors of black vs. white patients confirms the earlier TCGA finding. These findings suggest that ccRCC in black patients is a fundamentally different disease than ccRCC in white patients. Citation Format: Catherine L. Callahan, Lee E. Moore, Petra Lenz, Kendra Schwartz, Julie Ruterbusch, Faith Davis, Wong-Ho Chow, W. Marston Linehan, Maria J. Merino, Stephen M. Hewitt, Nathaniel Rothman, Jonathan N. Hofmann, Michael L. Nickerson, Mark P. Purdue. Differences in the frequencies of tumor VHL mutation and HIF-2α expression between black and white patients with clear cell renal carcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4237.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→