Basal cell of origin resolves neuroendocrine–tuft lineage plasticity in cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary paragraph Neuroendocrine and tuft cells are rare, chemosensory epithelial lineages defined by expression of ASCL1 and POU2F3 transcription factors, respectively 1,2 . Neuroendocrine cancers, including small cell lung cancer (SCLC), frequently display tuft-like subsets, a feature linked to poor patient outcomes 3–13 . The mechanisms driving neuroendocrine–tuft tumour heterogeneity, and the origins of tuft-like cancers are unknown. Using multiple genetically-engineered animal models of SCLC, we demonstrate that a basal cell of origin (but not the accepted neuroendocrine origin) generates neuroendocrine–tuft-like tumours that highly recapitulate human SCLC. Single-cell clonal analyses of basal-derived SCLC further uncovers unexpected transcriptional states and lineage trajectories underlying neuroendocrine–tuft plasticity. Uniquely in basal cells, introduction of genetic alterations enriched in human tuft-like SCLC, including high MYC, PTEN loss, and ASCL1 suppression, cooperate to promote tuft-like tumours. Transcriptomics of 944 human SCLCs reveal a basal-like subset and a tuft-ionocyte-like state that altogether demonstrate remarkable conservation between cancer states and normal basal cell injury response mechanisms 14–18 . Together, these data suggest that the basal cell is a plausible origin for SCLC and other neuroendocrine-tuft cancers that can explain neuroendocrine–tuft heterogeneity—offering new insights for targeting lineage plasticity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".