MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Deciphering colorectal cancer progression through integrative epigenomic analysis for precision therapeutics.

2025· article· en· W4410822690 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghazaleh Tavallaee, Amin Nooranikhojasteh, Elias Orouji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineEpigenomicsColorectal cancerCancerPrecision medicineOncologyInternal medicineBioinformaticsPathologyDNA methylationGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e15561 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC), the third most prevalent cancer globally, remains a major cause of cancer-related mortality. Genomic and epigenomic plasticity during CRC progression, particularly metastasis, poses significant challenges to effective treatment. Patient-derived organoids (PDOs) reflect the heterogeneous genetic and morphological composition of cancer cells, enabling ex vivo disease modeling. This study investigates the epigenomic makeup of human primary and metastatic CRC to advance precision epigenetic therapies. Methods: We analyzed 45 organoid models, including 40 CRC organoids (from primary tumors and liver/lung metastases) and 5 generated from healthy colonic tissue. Using integrative epigenomic profiling, including chromatin accessibility, chromatin state mapping (via six histone modifications), and 3D genome conformation, we constructed a comprehensive CRC epigenomic landscape. Results: Our analysis of CRC patient-derived organoids revealed a core set of accessible genomic regions shared across all organoids, irrespective of tumor location or metastatic status. This conserved chromatin signature highlights common regulatory pathways in CRC during disease progression. Unsupervised clustering based on epigenomic features revealed four distinct CRC subtypes, encompassing both primary and metastatic models. Notably, organoids derived from liver and lung metastases did not cluster by metastatic site, underscoring epigenomic convergence. Subtype D comprised 57.1% (8/14) of primary tumors, while subtypes B and C contained 47.3% (9/19) of liver metastases and 42.8% (3/7) of lung metastases, respectively. KRAS mutation status further stratified subtypes, with wild-type KRAS observed exclusively in subtypes A and B, while KRAS-mutant variants were enriched in subtypes C (6/7) and D (4/10). Histone modification patterns, defined by six marks (H3K4me1, H3K4me3, H3K27me3, H3K27ac, H3K36me3, and H3K9me3) revealed subtype-specific regulatory chromatin landscapes. Three-dimensional chromatin interactions were mapped, and genome-wide interaction contacts are used to identify various chromatin structures that may influence metastatic capacity. Conclusions: This study highlights distinct and shared epigenomic signatures in CRC PDOs, offering novel insights into tumor progression and metastasis. Integrative chromatin analysis provides a framework for identifying epigenetic biomarkers and epigenome targeting strategies.

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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.345
GPT teacher head0.643
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism→French-language works237,207→