MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract B102: A model for the origins of transcriptional heterogeneity in human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

2025· article· en· W4414580695 on OpenAlexaff
Sabrina Ge, Paul Tonon, Gun Ho Jang, Yu Zhang, Karen Ng, Eugenia Flores‐Figueroa, Julie M. Wilson, Anna Dodd, Amy X. Zhang, Aman Xu, Michelle Chan‐Seng‐Yue, Ayah Elqaderi, Ilinca M. Lungu, Stephanie Ramotar, Shawn Hutchinson, Daniela Bevacqua, Ayelet Borgida, Spring Holter, Pathum Kossinna, Ruth Isserlin, Véronique Voisin, Gary D. Bader, Erica S. Tsang, Robert C. Grant, Grainne M. O’Kane, David A. Tuveson, Oren Parnas, Federico Gaiti, Jennifer J. Knox, Steven Gallinger, Faiyaz Notta

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenotypeKRASPancreatic cancerTranscriptomeReprogrammingGenetic heterogeneityCancerMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transcriptional heterogeneity in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma can be separated into two major phenotypes, commonly referred to as Classical and Basal-like. Substantial work in the field has further refined the phenotypes and highlighted associations with outcome and treatment. However, there remains the fundamental question of how these transcriptional phenotypes originate in the disease. In mice, oncogenic reprogramming by Kras plays a central role in phenotype identity, but how these processes unfold in human tumours is largely unresolved. Based on analysis of the transcriptomes of 490 microdissected patient tumours, 48 single-cell RNA-seq and 10 single-cell multiome profiles, we distilled transcriptional heterogeneity into four high-fidelity phenotypes defined by distinct biological programs. Strikingly, on initial investigation, none of the phenotypes reflected the heterogeneity of the normal pancreas, as is common with cancers of other tissues. Upon investigating temporal emergence, the transcriptional phenotypes were found to arise in two phases from fundamentally different biological processes. Early phenotypes were found to emerge in non-aneuploid cells, and were unexpectedly present in the absence of KRAS mutations in humans. In contrast, late-emerging phenotypes developed after KRAS mutations with the onset of aneuploidy and were decoupled from tumour initiation. Biologically, early phenotypes derived from cell dedifferentiation processes whereas late phenotypes derived from lineage plasticity and epithelial remodelling. Transition from the early to late phenotypes fueled significant tumour heterogeneity and influenced therapeutic responses to KRAS inhibition. Together, these findings help redefine the ontogeny of human pancreatic cancer phenotypes. Citation Format: Sabrina Ge, Paul Tonon, Gun Ho Jang, Yu Zhang, Karen Ng, Eugenia Flores Figueroa, Julie M. Wilson, Anna Dodd, Amy Zhang, Amelia Xu, Michelle Chan-Seng-Yue, Ayah Elqaderi, Ilinca Lungu, Stephanie Ramotar, Shawn Hutchinson, Daniela Bevacqua, Ayelet Borgida, Spring Holter, Pathum Kossinna, Ruth Isserlin, Veronique Voisin, Gary D. Bader, Erica Tsang, Robert C. Grant, Grainne O'Kane, David Tuveson, Oren Parnas, Federico Gaiti, Jennifer J. Knox, Steven Gallinger, Faiyaz Notta. A model for the origins of transcriptional heterogeneity in human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Advances in Pancreatic Cancer Research—Emerging Science Driving Transformative Solutions; Boston, MA; 2025 Sep 28-Oct 1; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(18_Suppl_3):Abstract nr B102.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueCancer Research→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→