MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2995775886 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.panca19-a61

Abstract A61: Tandem duplicator phenotype: A potentially targetable genomic subgroup in pancreas cancer

2019· article· en· W2995775886 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amy X. Zhang, Grainne M. O’Kane, Robert E. Denroche, Gun Ho Jang, Sandra E. Fischer, Sarah Picardo, Ilinca M. Lungu, Anna Dodd, Julie M. Wilson, Yifan Wang, George Zogopoulos, Elina Elimova, Elaine Bouttell, Rebecca M. Prince, Raymond Woo-Jun Jang, James Biagi, Faiyaz Notta, Steve Gallinger, Jennifer J. Knox

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreKingston General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkInstitute of Cancer ResearchOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerMedicineInternal medicineOncologyEtiologyBreast cancerGenomePancreatic cancerOvarian cancerCancer researchGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: There is a paucity of predictive genomic biomarkers in pancreas cancer (PDA) that can direct personalized treatment. Patients with tumors that are deficient in homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRD) may benefit from platinum and/or PARP inhibition. Biallelic inactivation of BRCA1 can result in a tumor with characteristics of HRD and a tandem duplicator phenotype (TDP), where tandem duplications (TDs) are randomly distributed throughout the genome. The TDP has been described in breast and ovarian cancer, associated with perturbations in BRCA1, CDK12, FBXW17, and CCNE1. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of the TDP and outcomes in a large cohort of sequenced PDA. Methods: Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed in 192 resected and 190 advanced cases within the PanCuRx initiative and COMPASS trial at the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research and Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Tumors underwent laser capture enrichment prior to sequencing. Duplicator classification was applied using the previously described TDP score by Menghi et al. In addition, HRDetect scores were determined. Outcomes of patients with TDP tumors were evaluated. Results: Of 382 sequenced PDAC, 28 were classified as TDP (7.3%)—14 resected, 14 advanced. We identified three TDP groups based on etiology, including 6 BRCA1 inactivated tumors, 1 CCNE1 amplified tumor, and 21 tumors with no specific etiology, i.e., there were no genetic alterations in TDP-related genes (BRCA1, CCNE1, CDK12, and FBXW17). BRCA1 inactivated tumors were characterized by small TDs (median=12kb), whereas the one CCNE1 amplified case had much larger TDs (median=239kb). TDs in duplicators of unknown etiology spanned a wide range of sizes (median=91kb). TDP tumors were associated with high HRDetect scores (score > 0.7; p<0.0001, Fisher’s exact test), including all TDPs with BRCA1 inactivation, the tumor with CCNE1 amplification, and 10/21 with unknown etiology. In the resected cohort, there was no difference in overall survival comparing duplicators (n=12) to typical cases (n=162) (median 23.7 vs. 21.6 months, p=0.334). Disease-free survival was longer for duplicators compared to typical cases (18.3 vs. 12.4 months), but not significant (p=0.602). In patients with advanced disease receiving platinum therapy, superior responses were observed for patients with TDP (n=12) compared to typical tumors (n=88) (p<0.05). There was also a trend towards longer survival in TDPs vs. typicals on platinum (median 12.8 vs. 9.3 months, p=0.07). Conclusions: The TDP is evident in approximately 7% of PDA. This patient cohort may have a superior response to platinum chemotherapy or DNA-damaging agents, which warrants further investigation. Citation Format: Amy X. Zhang, Grainne M. O'Kane, Robert E. Denroche, Gun Ho Jang, Sandra E. Fischer, Sarah Picardo, Ilinca Lungu, Anna Dodd, Julie Wilson, Yifan Wang, George Zogopoulos, Elina Elimova, Elaine Bouttell, Rebecca Prince, Raymond Jang, James J. Biagi, Faiyaz Notta, Steve Gallinger, Jennifer J. Knox. Tandem duplicator phenotype: A potentially targetable genomic subgroup in pancreas cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer: Advances in Science and Clinical Care; 2019 Sept 6-9; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(24 Suppl):Abstract nr A61.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→