<scp>O<sup>6</sup></scp>‐methylguanine methyltransferase promoter methylation status of glioblastoma cell line clonal population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glioblastoma (GBM) remains a treatment‐resistant malignant brain tumor in large part because of its genetic heterogeneity and epigenetic plasticity. In this study, we investigated the epigenetic heterogeneity of GBM by evaluating the methylation status of the O6‐methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter in individual clones of a single cell derived from GBM cell lines. The U251 and U373 GBM cell lines, from the Brain Tumour Research Centre of the Montreal Neurological Institute, were used for the experiments. To evaluate the methylation status of the MGMT promoter, pyrosequencing and methylation‐specific PCR (MSP) were used. Moreover, mRNA and protein expression levels of MGMT in the individual GBM clones were evaluated. The HeLa cell line, which hyper‐expresses MGMT, was used as control. A total of 12 U251 and 12 U373 clones were isolated. The methylation status of 83 of 97 CpG sites in the MGMT promoter were evaluated by pyrosequencing, and 11 methylated CpG sites and 13 unmethylated CpG sites were evaluated by MSP. The methylation status by pyrosequencing was relatively high at CpG sites 3–8, 20–35, and 7–83, in both the U251 and U373 clones. Neither MGMT mRNA nor protein was detected in any clone. These findings demonstrate tumor heterogeneity among individual clones derived from a single GBM cell. MGMT expression may be regulated, not only by methylation of the MGMT promoter but by other factors as well. Further studies are needed to clarify the mechanisms underlying the epigenetic heterogeneity and plasticity of GBM.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".