MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968704349 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdz014.086

OTHR-09. IDENTIFYING EPIGENETIC SIGNATURES IN LUNG ADENOCARCINOMAS THAT PREDICT DEVELOPMENT OF BRAIN METASTASIS

2019· article· en· W2968704349 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Zuccato, Yasin Mamatjan, Kenneth Aldape, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrain metastasisMedicineOncologyInternal medicineCohortProportional hazards modelUnivariate analysisLung cancerMetastasisMultivariate analysisDNA methylationEpigeneticsAdenocarcinomaCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Metastases are the most common adult brain tumor with half spreading from lung cancers and they reduce median overall survival from 26 to 12 months. There are no robust patient-specific predictors of brain metastasis. Epigenetic signatures predict disease recurrence in other cancers and identifying brain metastasis methylation-based signatures may allow for treatment approaches to high-risk patients that prevent their development. METHODS: In 207 lung adenocarcinomas, multivariate cox time to brain metastasis analyses including clinically-relevant variables (lung tumor size and TNM nodal score) along with significant covariates on univariate analyses were performed. DNA was extracted from 142 of these tumors and profiled on the Illumina Infinium EPIC array. A generalized boosted regression classification model used differentially methylated CpG sites significantly predicting time to brain metastasis in a 70% training cohort cox analysis (p< 0.05). Resulting methylation-based risk scores were compared to size and nodal status in a multivariate analysis of the independent 30% testing cohort. RESULTS: Of 207 patients with 72 brain metastatic events, tumor size (HR=1.5, 95%CI 1.1–2.0, p=0.01), N status (N3 vs. N0, HR=9.9, 95%CI 3.1–31, p=0.0001), EGFR status (HR=0.4, 95%CI 0.2–0.8, p=0.014), and age (HR=0.7, 95%CI 0.5–1.0, p=0.039) independently predicted their development. Methylation-based risk scores significantly predicted time to brain metastasis in a univariate analysis of the testing cohort (p=0.03). A multivariate analysis of testing cohort patients identified methylation score as the only independent predictor of brain metastasis (HR=4.3, 95%CI 1.1–17, p=0.038) accounting for tumor size and N score. CONCLUSIONS: Genome-wide DNA methylation signatures predict brain metastasis development in lung adenocarcinomas independent of tumor size and nodal disease. The design of a nomogram combining methylation profile other clinical factors may be used to determine patient specific brain metastasis risk values to guide patient counselling, extent of treatment, and screening.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207