Expression of SOAT1 in Adrenocortical Carcinoma and Response to Mitotane Monotherapy: An ENSAT Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Objective response rate to mitotane in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is approximately 20%, and adverse drug effects are frequent. To date, there is no marker established that predicts treatment response. Mitotane has been shown to inhibit sterol-O-acyl transferase 1 (SOAT1), which leads to endoplasmic reticulum stress and cell death in ACC cells. OBJECTIVE: To investigate SOAT1 protein expression as a marker of treatment response to mitotane. PATIENTS: A total of 231 ACC patients treated with single-agent mitotane as adjuvant (n = 158) or advanced disease therapy (n = 73) from 12 ENSAT centers were included. SOAT1 protein expression was determined by immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens. SETTING: Retrospective study at 12 ACC referral centers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS: Sixty-one of 135 patients (45%) with adjuvant mitotane treatment had recurrences and 45/68 patients (66%) with mitotane treatment for advanced disease had progressive disease. After multivariate adjustment for sex, age, hormone secretion, tumor stage, and Ki67 index, RFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.85; P = 0.82), and DSS (HR = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.58-2.93; P = 0.53) in adjuvantly treated ACC patients did not differ significantly between tumors with high and low SOAT1 expression. Similarly, in the advanced stage setting, PFS (HR = 1.34; 95% CI, 0.63-2.84; P = 0.45) and DSS (HR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.31-1.70; P = 0.45) were comparable and response rates not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: SOAT1 expression was not correlated with clinical endpoints RFS, PFS, and DSS in ACC patients with mitotane monotherapy. Other factors appear to be relevant for mitotane treatment response and ACC patient survival.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".