MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281264061 · doi:10.1172/jci.insight.157164

Response to supraphysiological testosterone is predicted by a distinct androgen receptor cistrome

2022· article· en· W4281264061 on OpenAlexafffund
Xintao Qiu, Lisha G. Brown, Jennifer L. Conner, Holly M. Nguyen, Nadia Boufaied, Sarah Abou Alaiwi, Ji-Heui Seo, Talal El Zarif, Connor Bell, Edward O’Connor, Brian Hanratty, Mark M. Pomerantz, Matthew L. Freedman, Myles Brown, Michael C. Haffner, Peter S. Nelson, Felix Y. Feng, David P. Labbé, Henry W. Long, Eva Corey

Bibliographic record

VenueJCI Insight · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Cancer InstituteDOD Prostate Cancer Research ProgramFoundation MedicineJanssen Research and DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthInstitute for Prostate Cancer ResearchU.S. Department of DefenseSanofiGlaxoSmithKlineDana-Farber Cancer InstitutePfizerFoghorn TherapeuticsBristol-Myers SquibbProstate Cancer FoundationDoris Duke Charitable FoundationGilead SciencesMayer FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of WashingtonSafeway Foundation
KeywordsAndrogen receptorProstate cancerTranscriptomeAndrogenAndrogen deprivation therapyTestosterone (patch)Internal medicineTranscription factorMedicineCancer researchOncologyEndocrinologyBiologyBioinformaticsCancerHormoneGene expressionGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The androgen receptor (AR) is a master transcription factor that regulates prostate cancer (PC) development and progression. Inhibition of AR signaling by androgen deprivation is the first-line therapy with initial efficacy for advanced and recurrent PC. Paradoxically, supraphysiological levels of testosterone (SPT) also inhibit PC progression. However, as with any therapy, not all patients show a therapeutic benefit, and responses differ widely in magnitude and duration. In this study, we evaluated whether differences in the AR cistrome before treatment can distinguish between SPT-responding (R) and -nonresponding (NR) tumors. We provide the first preclinical evidence to our knowledge that SPT-R tumors exhibit a distinct AR cistrome when compared with SPT-NR tumors, indicating a differential biological role of the AR. We applied an integrated analysis of ChIP-Seq and RNA-Seq to the pretreatment tumors and identified an SPT-R signature that distinguishes R and NR tumors. Because transcriptomes of SPT-treated clinical specimens are not available, we interrogated available castration-resistant PC (CRPC) transcriptomes and showed that the SPT-R signature is associated with improved survival and has the potential to identify patients who would respond to SPT. These findings provide an opportunity to identify the subset of patients with CRPC who would benefit from SPT 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCI InsightSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207