Clonal transcriptomics identifies mechanisms of chemoresistance and empowers rational design of combination therapies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumour heterogeneity is thought to be a major barrier to successful cancer treatment due to the presence of drug resistant clonal lineages. However, identifying the characteristics of such lineages that underpin resistance to therapy has remained challenging. Here, we utilise clonal transcriptomics with WILD-seq; W holistic I nterrogation of L ineage D ynamics by seq uencing, in mouse models of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) to understand response and resistance to therapy, including BET bromodomain inhibition and taxane-based chemotherapy. These analyses revealed oxidative stress protection by NRF2 as a major mechanism of taxane resistance and led to the discovery that our tumour models are collaterally sensitive to asparagine deprivation therapy using the clinical stage drug L-asparaginase after frontline treatment with docetaxel. In summary, clonal transcriptomics with WILD-seq identifies mechanisms of resistance to chemotherapy that are also operative in patients and pin points asparagine bioavailability as a druggable vulnerability of taxane-resistant lineages.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".