MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Transcriptional profiling to identify a program of enzalutamide extreme non-response in lethal prostate cancer.

2025· article· en· W4410811254 on OpenAlexaff
Anbarasu Kumaraswamy, Ya‐Mei Hu, Joel A. Yates, Chao Zhang, Shangyuan Ye, Charles J. Ryan, David A. Quigley, Rahul Aggarwal, Robert E. Reiter, Tomasz M. Beer, Matthew B. Rettig, Martin Gleave, Primo N. Lara, Joshua M. Stuart, George Thomas, Felix Y. Feng, Eric J. Small, Zheng Xia, Joshi J. Alumkal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnzalutamideProstate cancerProfiling (computer programming)OncologyCancerInternal medicineAndrogen receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5084 Background: The androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) enzalutamide is one of the principal treatments for metastatic hormone-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Most patients respond to enzalutamide. However, tumors from a subset of patients exhibit extreme non-response and are primary refractory to treatment. We sought to understand the gene expression program of enzalutamide extreme non-response (ENR) and identify alternate therapeutic approaches for tumors driven by this program. Methods: We analyzed gene expression by RNA-sequencing in pre-treatment metastatic biopsies from men with CRPC treated on a prospective enzalutamide clinical trial (NCT02099864). We focused on those with ENR (progression within 3 months) vs. long-term response (progression after 24 months) and identified a gene program linked to enzalutamide ENR. We validated the utility of this program in additional patient cohorts using a multivariable analysis and in preclinical models. Results: Unsupervised clustering correctly classified ENR patients whose tumors harbored proliferative, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, and stemness genes sets. Using a supervised approach, we developed a gene signature to measure the ENR program. High expression of this program in CRPC patient validation cohorts was independently associated with poor tumor control with AR targeting in multivariable analysis. Conversely, high expression of the program was independently associated with benefit with docetaxel chemotherapy, suggesting the ENR program is predictive and not merely prognostic. In support of our findings, high expression of the ENR program was strongly linked to docetaxel sensitivity in a large panel of CRPC models. Finally, we identified putative regulators of the ENR program—several of which can be targeted pharmacologically with agents that are FDA-approved or in clinical trials. Conclusions: The enza ENR program we identified is independently predictive of ENR to AR targeting. However, patients whose tumors harbor this program may be good candidates for docetaxel chemotherapy or clinical trials testing agents that block putative regulators of this program.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.365 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→