MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measuring on-treatment genome-wide tumor copy number alterations in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in plasma is highly prognostic in metastatic breast cancer.

2019· article· en· W2947279348 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Aguilar, Josiane Lafleur, Susie Brousse, Cristiano Ferrario, Graham McLennan, Taylor J. Jensen, Kimberly Kelly, Mark Basik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerMetastatic breast cancerOncologyGenome instabilityCancerCell-free fetal DNAInternal medicineCirculating tumor cellTumor progressionMetastasisCopy-number variationGenomeGeneDNABiologyDNA damageGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1097 Background: The clinical management of metastatic breast cancer depends on the measurement of tumor response to successive drugs by serial imaging and changes in blood tumor markers, which remain the standard of care despite poor sensitivity and specificity. Highly sensitive and specific cfDNA secreted from the tumor can detect the changes in tumor-specific aberrations that have been shown to be associated with patient response in the metastatic setting. However, most approaches require prior sequencing of the tumor to target specific known mutations. Methods: Using low coverage genomic sequencing, a genomic instability number (GIN) was measured in cfDNA based on the detection of genome-wide tumor-specific DNA copy number alterations for 27 patients with metastatic breast cancer. The GIN value and its variation from baseline before treatment, as well as within 10 days and 3 weeks after start of therapy were compared with tumor response, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the patients. Patients were followed for a median of 22 months and we used a previously published GIN threshold at 170 for high vs low GIN values. Sequencing was performed blinded to the clinical results. Results: Baseline GIN values were not associated with tumor response at 3or 6 months, but showed a trend towards lower OS with higher GIN (p = 0.12). GIN values fell by an average of 28% in responders (stable disease or response) and 23% in those with progression (p = 0.85), but remained lower at 3 weeks only in the responders. High GIN values within 10 days and 3 weeks were associated with markedly worse OS (p = 0.014 and p = 0.009 respectively) and those at 3 weeks with worse PFS (p = 0.017). Hence the median survival of patients with high GIN at 10 days or 3 weeks was 12 months vs not reached for those with low GIN. The percentage drop of GIN at 10 days but not at 3 weeks was significantly associated with PFS (p = 0.016). Conclusions: These results demonstrate that GIN values of cfDNA measured at early on-treatment time points can predict PFS and OS with a high degree of accuracy. These findings deserve further study in a larger cohort but hold the promise of early prediction of clinical outcomes in a tumor-independent genome-wide approach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207