MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401980795 · doi:10.1038/s41698-024-00673-z

Pharmacogenomic discovery of genetically targeted cancer therapies optimized against clinical outcomes

2024· article· en· W4401980795 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Truesdell, Jessica Chang, Doris Coto Villa, Meiou Dai, Yulei Zhao, Robin McIlwain, Stephanie Young, Shawna L. Hiley, Andrew W. Craig, Tomas Babak

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Precision Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury AlbertaQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPharmacogenomicsMedicineCancerComputational biologyOncologyPharmacologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the clinical success of dozens of genetically targeted cancer therapies, the vast majority of patients with tumors caused by loss-of-function (LoF) mutations do not have access to these treatments. This is primarily due to the challenge of developing a drug that treats a disease caused by the absence of a protein target. The success of PARP inhibitors has solidified synthetic lethality (SL) as a means to overcome this obstacle. Recent mapping of SL networks using pooled CRISPR-Cas9 screens is a promising approach for expanding this concept to treating cancers driven by additional LoF drivers. In practice, however, translating signals from cell lines, where these screens are typically conducted, to patient outcomes remains a challenge. We developed a pharmacogenomic (PGx) approach called "Clinically Optimized Driver Associated-PGx" (CODA-PGX) that accurately predicts genetically targeted therapies with clinical-stage efficacy in specific LoF driver contexts. Using approved targeted therapies and cancer drugs with available real-world evidence and molecular data from hundreds of patients, we discovered and optimized the key screening principles predictive of efficacy and overall patient survival. In addition to establishing basic technical conventions, such as drug concentration and screening kinetics, we found that replicating the driver perturbation in the right context, as well as selecting patients where those drivers are genuine founder mutations, were key to accurate translation. We used CODA-PGX to screen a diverse collection of clinical stage drugs and report dozens of novel LoF genetically targeted opportunities; many validated in xenografts and by real-world evidence. Notable examples include treating STAG2-mutant tumors with Carboplatin, SMARCB1-mutant tumors with Oxaliplatin, and TP53BP1-mutant tumors with Etoposide or Bleomycin.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Precision OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207