MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362597283 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2023-4755

Abstract 4755: Screening non-small cell lung cancer organoids with epigenetic probes

2023· article· en· W4362597283 on OpenAlexaff
Khadija Jafarova, Panagiotis Prinos, Nikolina Radulovich, T. Koga, C.H. Arrowsmith, Geoffrey Liu, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related gene regulation
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreStructural Genomics ConsortiumUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpigeneticsOrganoidCancer researchCarcinogenesisDNA methylationBiologyEpigenetic therapyCancerMatrigelLung cancerMedicineCell biologyPathologyGeneticsGene expressionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: NSCLC is associated with high cancer-related mortality worldwide. Epigenetic modifications at the chromatin level have widely been linked to carcinogenesis. Epigenetic regulation not only contributes to the development of cancer, but it may also confer resistance to therapies by promoting the survival of clones that can overcome treatment-induced stress or give rise to complex tumor heterogeneity in response to cancer therapy. Investigating susceptibility resulting from epigenetic aberrations in tumor cells may reveal novel markers of therapies that target epigenetic aberrations. In this study, we treated NSCLC organoid models with a library of 41 epigenetic probes to identify epigenetic targets that affect tumor cell survival. Methods: Epigenetic screen. NSCLC organoid models were established from resected patient tumors or patient-derived xenografts. Organoids were dissociated into single cells and plated in matrigel-coated 384-well plate. Each model was treated with a library of epigenetic probes (1uM) and a DMSO control over a period of 8 days. Library was provided by Structural Genomics Consortium (www.thesgc.org) and contained compounds targeting a variety of protein domains some of which had activity on acetylation, methylation, histone de-methylation etc. CellTiter-Glo assay was performed to measure cell survival. Results: Among the epigenetic probe compounds tested on 26 models, LLY 283 (PRMT5 inhibitor) showed the most significant effect on inhibition of cell growth in 69% of organoid models (18/26) with suppression of >=40% as compared to the DMSO control. To assess differential responses to treatment with LLY 283, four organoid models were treated with 21 different concentrations of PRMT5 inhibitor. Growth curves of a sensitive (XDO181) and a less sensitive (XDO4056) models were compared. For XDO181 and XDO4056, IC50 values were calculated to be 4.7 nM and 31.8 nM respectively, indicating that a less sensitive model is associated with a 7-fold increase in IC50 value compared to the sensitive model. Conclusion: A screen using epigenetic compounds on NSCLC patient-derived organoids revealed sensitivity to PRMT5 inhibitor in 69% of the organoid models tested. Further investigation will explore the mechanisms that are associated with sensitivity to PRMT5 inhibition. Citation Format: Khadija Jafarova, Panagiotis Prinos, Nikolina Radulovich, Takamasa Koga, Cheryl Arrowsmith, Geoffrey Liu, Ming Sound Tsao. Screening non-small cell lung cancer organoids with epigenetic probes. [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 4755.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 ResearchSame topicCancer-related gene regulationFrench-language works237,207