Candidate Markers of Olaparib Response from Genomic Data Analyses of Human Cancer Cell Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The benefit of PARP inhibitor olaparib in relapsed and advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) is well established especially in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Identification of additional biomarkers can help expand the population of patients most likely to benefit from olaparib treatment. To identify candidate markers of olaparib response we analyzed genomic and in vitro olaparib response data from two independent groups of cancer cell lines. Using pan-cancer cell lines (n = 896) from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer database, we applied linear regression methods to identify statistically significant gene predictors of olaparib response based on mRNA expression. We then analyzed whole exome sequencing and mRNA gene expression data from our collection of 18 HGSOC cell lines previously classified as sensitive, intermediate, or resistant based on in vitro olaparib response for mutations, copy number variation and differential expression of candidate olaparib response genes. We identify genes previously associated with olaparib response (SLFN11, ABCB1), and discover novel candidate olaparib sensitivity genes with known functions including interaction with PARP1 (PUM3, EEF1A1) and involvement in homologous recombination DNA repair (ELP4). Further investigations at experimental and clinical levels are required to validate novel candidates, and ultimately determine their efficacy as potential biomarkers of olaparib sensitivity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".