MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362543756 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2023-90

Abstract 90: Exploring the role of common circulating tumor cell-associated genes in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer recurrence

2023· article· en· W4362543756 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Rotbauer, Melanie Dawe, Philippe L. Bédard, David W. Cescon, Susan J. Done

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineEstrogen receptorGene signatureCirculating tumor cellOncologyCancerCancer researchGeneInternal medicinePrimary tumorEstrogenMetastasisGene expressionBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite having the best survival among the molecular subtypes, estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer has a tendency for late recurrence. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are responsible for disease recurrence by seeding tumors at secondary sites. We have previously developed a CTC signature of 90 common regions of gene copy number gain and demonstrated that this signature is significantly more widespread among cells in metastases than primary tumors.1,2 The objective of our current work is to establish whether the expression data from a 133 gene panel largely derived from the CTC signature can be used to assess the risk of recurrence (ROR) in early ER+ breast cancer patients to help guide treatment decisions following surgery. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) ER+ breast tumor biopsies and linked normal (control) tissues from 192 patients are being analyzed with a custom NanoString nCounter probe set of our 133 CTC genes. From data gathered to date, several genes were shown to be significantly overexpressed in tumors compared to reference normal tissues. This includes MMP11, MKI67, LILRB4, UBE2T, BIRC5, CDC6, MYBL2, and NUF2, which had a log2 fold-change of at least 3.5 (n = 34, p < 0.01). The correlation of our CTC genes to ROR is being evaluated by comparison to the results of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score Test, a well-established clinical test for ROR in ER+ breast cancer, for each patient. So far, it has been shown that the intratumor heterogeneity (ITH) of CTC genes as established by DEPTH2, an ITH algorithm which evaluates mRNA levels, is significantly positively corelated to Oncotype DX score (n = 23, r = 0.41, p = 0.0495). Moving forward, we will create our own ROR scoring system based on gene expression and copy number data from the CTC gene panel and validate it by comparison to Oncotype DX score and other available clinical data for each of the 192 patient samples. The goal of our work is to gain a deeper understanding of the molecular mechanisms that drive metastasis and recurrence in ER+ breast cancer by focusing on CTCs which play a pivotal role in driving these events. 1. Kanwar N, Hu P, Bedard P, Clemons M, McCready D, Done SJ. Identification of genomic signatures in circulating tumor cells from breast cancer. International Journal of Cancer. 2015;137(2):332-344. doi:10.1002/ijc.29399 2. Kanwar N, Balde Z, Nair R, et al. Heterogeneity of Circulating Tumor Cell-Associated Genomic Gains in Breast Cancer and Its Association with the Host Immune Response. Cancer Research. 2021;81(24):6196-6206. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-21-1079‌ Citation Format: Martin Rotbauer, Melanie Dawe, Philippe Bedard, David Cescon, Susan Done. Exploring the role of common circulating tumor cell-associated genes in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer recurrence [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 90.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→