MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973208486 · doi:10.1002/pros.23903

Functional validation of metabolic genes that distinguish Gleason 3 from Gleason 4 prostate cancer foci

2019· article· en· W2973208486 on OpenAlexafffund
Domenica Roberto, Shamini Selvarajah, Paul C. Park, David M. Berman, Vasundara Venkateswaran

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Prostate · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersProstate Cancer Canada
KeywordsDU145Prostate cancerCancer researchGene knockdownCancerBiologyProstateCancer cellPhenotypeGene expression profilingGeneLNCaPMedicineGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gleason grade is among the most powerful clinicopathological classification systems used to assess risk of lethal potential in prostate cancer, yet its biologic basis is poorly understood. Notably, pure low-grade cancers, comprised predominantly of Gleason pattern 3 (G3) are typically indolent, with lethal potential emerging with the progression of higher-grade Gleason patterns 4 (G4) or 5. One of the hallmarks of more aggressive cancer phenotypes is the stereotyped set of metabolic characteristics that transformed cells acquire to facilitate unregulated growth. In the present study, we profiled expression signatures of metabolic genes that are differentially expressed between G3 and G4 cancer foci and investigated the functional role of two of the profiled genes, PGRMC1 and HSD17B4, in prostate cancer cells. METHODS: Gene expression profiling was conducted using 32 G3 and 32 G4 cancer foci from patients with 3+3 and ≥4+3 tumors, respectively. A 95-gene Nanostring probe set was used to probe genes associated with energy metabolism. Two out of five genes (PGRMC1 and HSD17B4) that significantly distinguish between G3 and G4 were functionally validated in vitro using established prostate cancer cells (PC3, DU145). Expression of PGRMC1 and HSD17B4 was knocked down and subsequent studies were performed to analyze cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis. Mechanistic studies that explored the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway were performed by Western blot. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis identified five metabolic genes that were differentially expressed between G3 and G4 stroma (P < .05). Functional validation studies revealed that knockdown of PGRMC1 and HSD17B4 significantly decreased cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, and increased apoptosis in PC3 and DU145 cells. Mechanistic studies showed that these effects, after PGRMC1 knockdown, were possibly mediated through alterations in downstream components of the EGFR, protein kinase B, and nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells pathways. CONCLUSION: The following study provides evidence supporting the use of metabolic genes PGRMC1 and HSD17B4 as a prognostic biomarker for the distinction between G3 and G4 prostate cancers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.787

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe ProstateSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207