MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Global circulating free DNA methylation and fragmentome deconvolution in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immunotherapy (GOLDEN).

2023· article· en· W4379281722 on OpenAlexaff
Pavlina Spiliopoulou, Ming Han, Brooke E. Wilson, Adrian G. Sacher, Nazanin Fallah‐Rad, Srikala S. Sridhar, Elizabeth Shah, Vanessa Speers, Celeste Yu, Madhuran Thiagarajah, Ilinca M. Lungu, Sarah Picardo, Marco Iafolla, Bernard Lam, Lillian L. Siu, Aaron R. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsWilliam Osler Health SystemPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClear cell renal cell carcinomaRenal cell carcinomaOncologyDNA methylationInternal medicineImmunotherapyMethylationBiomarkerCancerCancer researchGeneBiologyGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4544 Background: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) lacks molecular biomarkers. Cell-free methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing (cfMeDIP-seq) is a new, non-invasive approach to the detection of RCC-derived DNA in the circulation. In the GOLDEN study (NCT03702309), we explored the role of cfMeDIP-seq and fragmentomic dynamics as a biomarker, during immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI)-based treatment in mRCC patients (pts). Methods: Blood samples from mRCC pts were collected before and during treatment. Response to treatment was defined by the treating oncologist as: response, any degree of radiological tumor regression; stable disease (SD), no radiological change; or progressive disease (PD), radiological/clinical progression. More than 10ng of plasma cfDNA was subject to cfMeDIP-seq. A prognostic pan-cancer methylation signature previously generated using TCGA tissue methylation arrays was applied to cfMeDIP-seq output and cancer-signal methylation (CSM) score was calculated. An RCC-specific methylation signature, previously generated by identifying differentially methylated regions between RCC pts and controls, was applied ( Nuzzo et al, Nat Med 2020). Genome-wide fragmentation profiles were generated using DELFI. Using medians as cut off, log-rank test was performed to assess overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled and n=33 received systemic treatment. 31/35 pts (89%) had clear cell and 4/35 (11%) non-clear cell histology. Median age was 61 (30-81) years and the M:F ratio was 6:1. Patients’ IMDC prognostic risk score was favorable n=6/35 (17%), intermediate n=23/35 (65%) and poor n=6/35 (17%). 20/33 (61%) patients received ipilimumab/nivolumab, 10/33 (30%) nivolumab and n=3/33 (9%) pembrolizumab/axitinib. There were n=14/33 (42%) responders, n=4/33 (12%) pts with SD and 15/33 (45%) pts with PD. Patients with high pan-cancer CSM score at baseline trended towards worse OS (HR 3.86, p = 0.079). Fragmentomics signature, consisting of increased proportion of short cfDNA fragments, showed a trend for worse PFS (HR = 3.04, p = 0.075) in on-treatment samples. Using the RCC-specific methylation signature, we found that those with an increase in signature score from baseline to on-treatment had better PFS (HR=2.4x10-10, p=0.002, n=10) and a trend towards better OS (HR=0.17, p=0.074, n=10). We hypothesize that RCC tissue-specific cell death early during ICI treatment could underpin this increase in the methylation score. Conclusions: This small study is the first report on the role of cfMeDIPseq-derived methylation and fragmentomic signatures in patients with mRCC undergoing ICI-based treatment. We found several trends and one significant association between these signatures and pt outcomes, which support further validation in larger cohorts. Clinical trial information: NCT03702309 .

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→