MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract A016 EWSR1 in Ewing sarcoma cells exhibits enhanced recruitment to sites of active transcription compared to that observed in non-Ewing sarcoma cells

2024· article· en· W4402267965 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Soumya Sundara Rajan, Tamara L. Jones, Vernon Justice Ebegboni, Langston Lim, Michael J. Kruhlak, Natasha J. Caplen

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEwing's sarcomaSarcomaCancer researchTranscription (linguistics)BiologyMedicineTranscription factorPathologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The initiating genetic event in several pediatric tumor-types, including Ewing sarcoma (EWS), involve translocations affecting the EWSR1 locus. The EWSR1 gene encodes EWSR1, a transcriptional regulator. In EWS cells expressing the fusion oncoprotein EWSR1::FLI1, studies have shown disrupted function of EWSR1 function and that this contributes to the deregulated gene expression observed in these tumors. Recently, we reported the nucleoplasmic organization of endogenous EWSR1 in EWS cells. In brief, we determined that at a resolution of ∼120 nm, EWSR1 is present in two states, a distributed state which is present throughout the nucleoplasm and as foci. Both EWSR1 states localize with nascent RNA, while foci also significantly colocalize with phosphorylated RNA polymerase II (p-RNA pol II). In this study, we have examined EWSR1’s localization at a higher resolution (40 nm) in EWS and non-EWS cells. For this study, we used two EWS cell lines, A673 and TC-32, and a non-EWSR1 driven sarcoma cell line, HT-1080 that expresses EWSR1 and FLI1. Using gene editing, we generated EWSR1 reporter cell lines that express either mNeonGreen or the FLAG peptide fused to the N-terminus of EWSR1. In A673 cells, we also generated isogenic cell lines that express an 11 amino acid peptide (HiBiT) fused to either EWSR1 or EWSR1::FLI1. Following validation of successfully modified clones, we used fluorescence or immunofluorescence (IF) and super-resolution confocal and stimulated emission depletion microscopy to assess protein localization. We observed that EWSR1’s overall organization in A673, TC-32 and HT-1080 cells is similar with over 95% of nuclear localization and its existence in two states, distributed and foci. At a resolution of 40 nm or less, we found that EWSR1 foci in EWS and non-EWS cells are composed of 3 to 6 distinct IF signals. Furthermore, in all three cell lines, we observed that the distributed EWSR1 signal exists as a fibro-granular network that colocalizes with nascent RNA. While these features proved similar between the three cell lines, we detected some differences in EWSR1’s organization in EWS and non-EWS cells. Specifically, in the HT-1080 cells, EWSR1 foci are smaller (∼80 nm) than that seen in EWS cells (A673: ∼247 nm, TC-32: ∼578 nm). Also, EWS cells exhibit minimal localization of EWSR1 to nucleoli, but in HT-1080 cells, we observed EWSR1 in one or more nucleoli of ∼30% of cells. In addition, we observed significantly less colocalization of EWSR1 foci with p-RNA pol II in the HT-1080 cells (Pearson’s correlation coefficient (PCC) = 0.47) compared to EWS cells (PCC, A673 = 0.85; TC-32 = 0.87). One reason for these differences could be the interaction of EWSR1 with EWSR1::FLI1 affecting EWSR1’s localization. To begin to evaluate this hypothesis, we examined the nuclear localizations of EWSR1::FLI1 and EWSR1 and observed colocalization of these proteins (PCC=0.45). Collectively, our study of endogenous EWSR1 shows its localization in EWS cells differs from that of non-EWS cells, which could affect the regulation of gene expression in EWS. Citation Format: Soumya Sundara Rajan, Tamara L. Jones, Vernon J. Ebegboni, Langston Lim, Michael J. Kruhlak, Natasha J. Caplen. EWSR1 in Ewing sarcoma cells exhibits enhanced recruitment to sites of active transcription compared to that observed in non-Ewing sarcoma cells [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Advances in Pediatric Cancer Research; 2024 Sep 5-8; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(17 Suppl):Abstract nr A016.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicRNA modifications and cancer→French-language works237,207→