MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409625082 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2025-541

Abstract 541: PARP and autophagy inhibition synergy in small cell lung cancer

2025· article· en· W4409625082 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tony Yu, Ranya Barayan, Lifang Song, Venkatasubramanian Vidhyasagar, Sree Narayanan Nair, Vivek M. Philip, Benjamin H. Lok

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutophagyLung cancerPoly ADP ribose polymeraseCancer researchCancerBiologyMedicineInternal medicineApoptosisGeneticsDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma comprising 15% of lung cancers. First-line treatment with platinum and etoposide chemotherapy—and radiotherapy for limited stage disease—produces good initial response, but most patients suffer treatment-resistant relapse within 2 years. The median survival is under 10 months, with immunotherapy increasing this by about 2 months. This regimen has changed minimally in 3 decades, fueling a need for more effective therapies. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) effectively induce DNA damage in SCLC and have shown potential in this setting, but response is variable, so we aimed to identify mechanisms through which SCLC may be sensitized to PARPi therapy. Methods: CRISPR dropout screens were conducted using the Toronto KnockOut v1 (TKOv1) CRISPR library in the SBC5 and H82 SCLC cell lines, with the PARPi, olaparib, as the selection pressure. DNA sequencing was performed at days 25 and 35 for SBC5 and days 28 and 39 for H82. Top hits were identified by gene dropout in the olaparib condition versus the control, with a false discovery rate (FDR) cutoff of 0.05. Gene ontology analysis was used to identify critical pathways. Stable shRNA knockdown cell lines were generated using lentiviral transduction and validated by Western blot. Cells were treated with olaparib and assayed for viability with CellTiter-Glo 2.0. In wild-type cell lines, therapeutic mTOR activation with MHY1485 was validated by Western blot and therapeutic autophagy inhibition with chloroquine (CQ) or GNS561 was validated by Western blot after 3 hours starvation in EBSS medium. Efficacy of autophagy inhibitors alone and in combination with PARPi was assayed by cell viability, and SynergyFinder+ was used to quantify synergism of the combination. Results: CRISPR screening identified mTOR pathway regulators, including components of the TSC and GATOR1 complexes, and gene ontology analysis indicated downregulation of TOR signaling and upregulation of autophagy as key pathways which confer PARPi sensitivity when lost. TSC1/2 knockdown cell lines exhibit reduced viability after PARPi treatment. MHY1485 treatment blocked autophagy as indicated by LC3B-II accumulation, but combination therapy with MHY1485 and olaparib was antagonistic due to proliferative effects of MHY1485. CQ or GNS561 treatment also blocked autophagy, and SCLC cell lines had varying sensitivity to these agents as monotherapies. Autophagy inhibition synergized with PARPi, sensitizing SCLC cell lines to PARPi therapy. Conclusions: TSC1/2 knockdown sensitizes SCLC cell lines to PARPi in concordance with our model that mTOR downregulation promotes autophagy and cell survival after PARPi therapy. While mTOR upregulation was antagonistic with PARPi and promoted cell growth, autophagy inhibitors were a superior therapeutic approach, synergizing with PARPi in vitro. Citation Format: Tony Yu, Ranya Barayan, Lifang Song, Vidhyasagar Venkatasubramanian, Sree N. Nair, Vivek Philip, Benjamin H. Lok. PARP and autophagy inhibition synergy in small cell lung cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 541.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207