MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996314623 · doi:10.1002/path.5372

Interpretation of somatic <i>POLE</i> mutations in endometrial carcinoma

2019· article· en· W2996314623 on OpenAlexafffund
Alicia León‐Castillo, Heidi Britton, Melissa K. McConechy, Jessica N. McAlpine, Remi A. Nout, Stefan Kommoss, Sara Y. Brucker, Joseph W. Carlson, E. Epstein, Tilman T. Rau, Tjalling Bosse, David N. Church, C. Blake Gilks

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Pathology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealth FoundationAcademy of Medical SciencesKWF KankerbestrijdingNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBC Cancer FoundationCancer Research UKMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsSomatic cellInterpretation (philosophy)CarcinomaEndometrial cancerInternal medicineOncologyMedicineBiologyGeneticsPhilosophyCancerGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathogenic somatic missense mutations within the DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE) exonuclease domain define the important subtype of ultramutated tumours ('POLE-ultramutated') within the novel molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma (EC). However, clinical implementation of this classifier requires systematic evaluation of the pathogenicity of POLE mutations. To address this, we examined base changes, tumour mutational burden (TMB), DNA microsatellite instability (MSI) status, POLE variant frequency, and the results from six in silico tools on 82 ECs with whole-exome sequencing from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Of these, 41 had one of five known pathogenic POLE exonuclease domain mutations (EDM) and showed characteristic genomic alterations: C>A substitution > 20%, T>G substitutions > 4%, C>G substitutions < 0.6%, indels < 5%, TMB > 100 mut/Mb. A scoring system to assess these alterations (POLE-score) was developed; based on their scores, 7/18 (39%) additional tumours with EDM were classified as POLE-ultramutated ECs, and the six POLE mutations present in these tumours were considered pathogenic. Only 1/23 (4%) tumours with non-EDM showed these genomic alterations, indicating that a large majority of mutations outside the exonuclease domain are not pathogenic. The infrequent combination of MSI-H with POLE EDM led us to investigate the clinical significance of this association. Tumours with pathogenic POLE EDM co-existent with MSI-H showed genomic alterations characteristic of POLE-ultramutated ECs. In a pooled analysis of 3361 ECs, 13 ECs with DNA mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd)/MSI-H and a pathogenic POLE EDM had a 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) of 92.3%, comparable to previously reported POLE-ultramutated ECs. Additionally, 14 cases with non-pathogenic POLE EDM and MMRd/MSI-H had a 5-year RFS of 76.2%, similar to MMRd/MSI-H, POLE wild-type ECs, suggesting that these should be categorised as MMRd, rather than POLE-ultramutated ECs for prognostication. This work provides guidance on classification of ECs with POLE mutations, facilitating implementation of POLE testing in routine clinical care. © 2019 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations392
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PathologySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207