98%
921
2 minutes
20
Purpose: Precise mechanism-based gene expression signatures (GES) have been developed in appropriate in vitro and in vivo model systems, to identify important cancer-related signaling processes. However, some GESs originally developed to represent specific disease processes, primarily with an epithelial cell focus, are being applied to heterogeneous tumor samples where the expression of the genes in the signature may no longer be epithelial-specific. Therefore, unknowingly, even small changes in tumor stroma percentage can directly influence GESs, undermining the intended mechanistic signaling.
Experimental Design: Using colorectal cancer as an exemplar, we deployed numerous orthogonal profiling methodologies, including laser capture microdissection, flow cytometry, bulk and multiregional biopsy clinical samples, single-cell RNA sequencing and finally spatial transcriptomics, to perform a comprehensive assessment of the potential for the most widely used GESs to be influenced, or confounded, by stromal content in tumor tissue. To complement this work, we generated a freely-available resource, ConfoundR; https://confoundr.qub.ac.uk/, that enables users to test the extent of stromal influence on an unlimited number of the genes/signatures simultaneously across colorectal, breast, pancreatic, ovarian and prostate cancer datasets.
Results: Findings presented here demonstrate the clear potential for misinterpretation of the meaning of GESs, due to widespread stromal influences, which in-turn can undermine faithful alignment between clinical samples and preclinical data/models, particularly cell lines and organoids, or tumor models not fully recapitulating the stromal and immune microenvironment.
Conclusions: Efforts to faithfully align preclinical models of disease using phenotypically-designed GESs must ensure that the signatures themselves remain representative of the same biology when applied to clinical samples.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9475248 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-1102 | DOI Listing |
Nurs Crit Care
September 2025
School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.
Background: Optimal oral care is essential in preventing non-ventilator hospital-associated pneumonia and enhancing patient comfort. However, nurses' clinical oral care practices for patients not on mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit are both underreported and understudied.
Aim: To explore intensive care nurses' clinical oral care practices for patients not on mechanical ventilation in intensive care units.
Health Commun
September 2025
Department of Library and Information Science, Rutgers University.
Patient portals have the potential to both improve and harm patient-clinician partnerships by reshaping how health information is exchanged and how patients and providers communicate. Patients ( = 20) and primary care clinicians ( = 11) purposively sampled from clinics serving diverse New Jersey communities were interviewed. Patients distinguished two portal functions - linear information exchange and bidirectional communication - but did so in different ways.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEmerg Med Australas
October 2025
Emergency and Trauma Centre, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Objectives: Acute pyelonephritis (APN) is a common diagnosis among patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED). It is treated by empiric antibiotics within the ED. With a rise in antimicrobial resistance globally, it is unknown whether patients are being managed with empiric antibiotics that are appropriate for the causative organisms of APN.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCirc Genom Precis Med
September 2025
Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA. (A.K.Y., A.C.R., L.S.S., A.A.Q., Y.V.S.).
Background: Cardio-kidney-metabolic (CKM) disease represents a significant public health challenge. While proteomics-based risk scores (ProtRS) enhance cardiovascular risk prediction, their utility in improving risk prediction for a composite CKM outcome beyond traditional risk factors remains unknown.
Methods: We analyzed 23 815 UK Biobank participants without baseline CKM disease, defined by -Tenth Revision codes as cardiovascular disease (coronary artery disease, heart failure, stroke, peripheral arterial disease, atrial fibrillation/flutter), kidney disease (chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease), or metabolic disease (type 2 diabetes or obesity).