Genomic and epigenomic <i>BRCA</i> alterations predict adaptive resistance and response to platinum-based therapy in patients with triple-negative breast and ovarian carcinomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and ovarian carcinomas (OvCas) with BRCA1 promoter methylation ( BRCA1 meth) respond more poorly to alkylating agents compared to those bearing mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 ( BRCA mut). This is a conundrum given the biologically equivalent homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) induced by these genetic and epigenetic BRCA perturbations. We dissected this problem through detailed genomic analyses of TNBC and OvCa cohorts and experimentation with patient-derived xenografts and genetically engineered cell lines. We found that despite identical downstream genomic mutational signatures associated with BRCA1 meth and BRCA mut states, BRCA1 meth uniformly associates with poor outcomes. Exposure of BRCA1 meth TNBCs to platinum chemotherapy, either as clinical treatment of a patient or as experimental in vivo exposure of preclinical patient derived xenografts, resulted in allelic loss of BRCA1 methylation and increased BRCA1 expression and platinum resistance. These data suggest that, unlike BRCA mut cancers, where BRCA loss is a genetically “fixed” deficiency state, BRCA1 meth cancers are highly adaptive to genotoxin exposure and, through reversal of promoter methylation, recover BRCA1 expression and become resistant to therapy. We further found a specific augmented immune transcriptional signal associated with enhanced response to platinum chemotherapy but only in patients with BRCA-proficient cancers. We showed how integrating both this cancer immune signature and the presence of BRCA mutations results in more accurate predictions of patient response when compared to either HRD status or BRCA status alone. This underscores the importance of defining BRCA heterogeneity in optimizing the predictive precision of assigning response probabilities in TNBC and OvCa.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".