Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Robbins, H.

Publications and source records attributed to Robbins, H..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

T Cell Receptor Diversity, Cancer and Sex: Insights from 30,000 TCRβ Repertoires

Immunoediting posits that mutation and immunity jointly shape cancer evolution, yet their population-level interplay remains uncertain. Here we analyze T cell receptor (TCR) {beta} repertoires from 30,000 individuals and find that TCR diversity, essential for recognizing and eliminating malignant cells, declines with age. This immune decline occurs 11 years later in females and coincides with their lower cancer incidence, suggesting a biological connection. To test this link, we formalize immunoediting as a quantitative model of carcinogenesis, relating the measured age-associated decline in TCR diversity to rising cancer incidence. We find that both mutational and immune processes shape cancer risk, with lower incidence in females attributable to delayed immune decline. Extending this analysis across subtypes uncovers structured patterns in cancer incidence that reflect the relative contributions of these processes. Cancers cluster along an emergent immune-mutation axis that aligns with known features of cancer biology and indicates convergent evolutionary dynamics. Together, our results establish a quantitative, population-level framework for immunoediting that connects direct measurements of immune competence to cancer risk, integrating the molecular mechanisms, evolutionary dynamics and incidence patterns of cancer to reveal a fundamental balance between mutation and immunity that underlies carcinogenesis.

cancer biology↗

Transparent and Reproducible Research Practices in the Surgical Literature

Previous studies have established a baseline of minimal reproducibility in the social science and biomedical literature. Clinical research is especially deficient in factors of reproducibility. Surgical journals contain fewer clinical trials than non-surgical ones, suggesting that it should be easier to reproduce the outcomes of surgical literature. In this study, we evaluated a broad range of indicators related to transparency and reproducibility in a random sample of 300 articles published in surgery-related journals between 2014 and 2018. A minority of our sample made available their materials (2/186, 95% C.I. 0-2.2%), protocols (1/196, 0-1.3%), data (19/196, 6.3-13%), or analysis scripts (0/196, 0-1.9%). Only one study was adequately pre-registered. No studies were explicit replications of previous literature. Most studies (162/292 50-61%) declined to provide a funding statement, and few declared conflicts of interest (22/292, 4.8-11%). Most have not been cited by systematic reviews (183/216, 81-89%) or meta-analyses (188/216, 83-91%), and most were behind a paywall (187/292, 58-70%). The transparency of surgical literature could improve with adherence to baseline standards of reproducibility.

scientific communication and education↗