Genetic correlates of therapeutic toxicities of stage III colon carcinoma patients treated with adjuvant FOLFOX+/-cetuximab (NCCTG N0147, Alliance).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3604 Background: Limited research has investigated the role of variation in the host genome as a determinant of colon carcinoma (CC) outcomes, including toxicity due to therapeutic agents. We examined the relationship between germline genetic factors and treatment-associated serious adverse events (SAEs) in a population of CC patients in which treatment was standardized and follow-up for outcomes was uniformly conducted. Methods: Using existing biospecimens from CC patients with resected stage III disease in a phase III randomized trial of FOLFOX adjuvant chemotherapy with and without cetuximab (NCCTG N0147), genome-wide genotyping arrays were conducted for 2200 patients for a total of ~20 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Using logistic regression models we assessed SNP-specific associations with SAEs, utilizing a discovery-based approach to search the genome in an unbiased manner. Detailed information on SAEs was collected using the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, v3.0). Analyses evaluating associations with specific classes of common grade ≥3 SAEs were performed, including gastrointestinal toxicities, neutropenia, and paresthesias. A threshold of P < 5x10-8was used to denote genome-wide significance. Results: Among patients who received FOLFOX, several SNPs on chr 15 near the ANP32A gene and on chr 2 near the CD207 gene were statistically significantly associated with grade ≥3 neuropathy. The strongest SNP-specific associations in these regions were in the range of odds ratio (OR) = 1.3, P = 2.8×10−10 and OR = 1.5, P = 2.7×10−10, respectively. Conclusions: Findings from this genome-wide analysis demonstrate the potential importance of germline genetic variation in influencing CC patients’ experience of specific toxicities to FOLFOX regimens. These results highlight two genomic regions of potential interest for understanding the biological mechanism for such toxicities, although further evaluation and replication is needed. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180820, U10CA180863, U10CA180888, CCSRI 021039, R01CA176272, Eli Lilly & Co, Pfizer, Sanofi. Clinical trial information: NCT00079274 .
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".