Chromatin State Dynamics Confers Specific Therapeutic Strategies in Enhancer Subtypes of Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The extent and function of chromatin state aberrations during colorectal cancer (CRC) progression is not completely understood. Here, by comprehensive epigenomic characterization of 56 tumors, adenomas, and their matched normal tissues, we define the dynamics of chromatin states during the progression of colorectal cancer. H3K27ac-marked active enhancer state could distinguish between different stages of CRC progression. By epigenomic editing, we present evidence that gains of tumor-specific enhancers for crucial oncogenes, such as ASCL2 and FZD10 , was crucial for excessive proliferation. Consistently, combination of MEK plus bromodomain (BET) inhibition was found to have synergistic effects in CRC patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. Probing inter-tumor heterogeneity, we identified four distinct enhancer subtypes (EpiC), three of which correlate well with previously defined transcriptomic subtypes (CMSs). Importantly, CMS2 can be divided into two EpiC subgroups with significant survival differences. Leveraging such correlation, we devised a combinatorial therapeutic strategy of enhancer-blocking bromodomain inhibitors with pathway-specific inhibitors (PARPi, EGFRi, and TGFβi) for three EPIC groups. Our data suggest that the dynamics of active enhancer underlies colorectal cancer progression and the patient-specific active enhancer patterns govern their unique gene expression patterns which can be leveraged for precision combination therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".