MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract C020: Novel insights from the investigation of experimental mutational signatures in early-onset colorectal cancer and colonic polyps

2025· article· en· W4417202902 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Georgeson, Alysha Prisc, Jihoon E. Joo, Khalid Mahmood, Romy Walker, Mark Clendenning, Julia Como, Natalie Diepenhorst, Julie McDonald, Steven Gallinger, Robert C. Grant, Dylan E. O’Sullivan, Darren R. Brenner, Finlay Macrae, Christophe Rosty, Ingrid Winship, Mark A. Jenkins, Daniel D. Buchanan

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColorectal cancerCOSMIC cancer databaseExome sequencingCancerExomeMutationGermline mutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Profiling colorectal cancers (CRCs) for tumor mutational signatures (TMS) offers new opportunities to characterize molecular subtypes. Recently, COSMIC published a comprehensive set of experimental mutational signatures that directly link specific environmental exposures to mutational patterns observed in human cancers. Environmental exposures are recognized as major contributors to CRC development and have been hypothesized to drive the recent rise in early-onset CRC (EOCRC), but the molecular fingerprints of these exposures in EOCRCs have not been systematically characterized. Methods: We performed whole exome sequencing (WES) on tumor and matched blood-derived DNA from 324 non-hereditary, mismatch repair proficient early-onset samples (diagnosed <55 years of age) comprising 277 CRCs and 47 pre-malignant polyps. Mutational signatures were calculated using a novel approach that combined COSMIC v3.4 signatures previously observed in CRC (n=26) and a curated set of experimental mutational signatures (n=50). Environmental signatures were filtered to human iPSC-derived signatures, excluding those with a negative AMES test, those marked as controls, and signatures not seen previously in CRC. Signature definitions with >95% cosine similarity were merged. Results: On average, 24.7% ± 10.1% (mean ± s.d, range 0.1%-60.1%) of somatic mutations were assigned to environmental signatures. Across the cohort, 14% (46/324) exhibited a dominant environmental signature, with N-nitrosopyrrolidine being the most prevalent (6.2%, 20/324). Premalignant lesions showed higher rates of dominant environmental signatures (21%, 10/47) compared to invasive cancers, suggesting environmental exposures may be a key component in early carcinogenesis. Conclusions: This study provides a comprehensive view of the landscape of mutational processes in non-hereditary mismatch repair proficient EOCRC and early-onset polyps through assessment of both tumor mutational signatures and experimental mutational signatures. Environmental exposures represent a significant component of the mutational landscape in early-onset colorectal neoplasia, with enhanced prevalence in premalignant lesions. These findings support the likely role of environmental drivers in the rising incidence of EOCRC. Citation Format: Peter Georgeson, Alysha Prisc, Jihoon Joo, Khalid Mahmood, Romy Walker, Mark Clendenning, Julia Como, Natalie Diepenhorst, Julie McDonald, Steven Gallinger, Robert Grant, Dylan E. O’Sullivan, Darren R. Brenner, Finlay Macrae, Christophe Rosty, Ingrid M. Winship, Mark A. Jenkins, Daniel D. Buchanan. Novel insights from the investigation of experimental mutational signatures in early-onset colorectal cancer and colonic polyps [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: The Rise in Early-Onset Cancers—Knowledge Gaps and Research Opportunities; 2025 Dec 10-13; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(23_Suppl):Abstract nr C020.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 venueClinical Cancer Research→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→