Metadata record for the article: TCERG1L allelic variation is associated with cisplatin-induced hearing loss in childhood cancer, a PanCareLIFE study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This metadata record provides details of the data supporting the claims of the related article: “TCERG1L allelic variation is associated with cisplatin-induced hearing loss in childhood cancer, a PanCareLIFE study”.The related study used a genome-wide association (GWAS) approach to investigate genetic susceptibility to cisplatin-induced ototoxicity in paediatric cancer patients. The study identified a genetic variant in the gene TCERG1L (rs893507) as being associated with hearing loss in this patient cohort.<br>Type of data: GWAS summary statistics; Mus musculus gene expression dataSubject of data: Homo sapiens - cisplatin-treated, non-cranial irradiated patientsSample size: 390 participantsPopulation characteristics:PCL discovery cohort (n=390): median age at diagnosis 11.1 years (0.0-18.8); median age at audiological testing 11.8 years (0.3-19.0); median total cumulative dose cisplatin 480 mg/m2 (range: 40-950 mg/m2). 76 (19.5%) patients had been treated with additional carboplatin. 168 (43.1%) patients developed Muenster ≥2b hearing loss.Canadian first replication cohort (n=192): median age at diagnosis 4.1 years (0.1-18.8); median cumulative dose cisplatin 400 mg/m2 (300-480 mg/m2). 115 patients (59.9%) developed Muenster ≥2b hearing loss.PCL second replication cohort (n=188): median age at diagnosis 11.1 years (0.3-18.0); median cumulative dose of cisplatin 480 mg/m2 (83-770); 94 survivors (50%) developed Muenster ≥2b hearing loss.Recruitment: PCL discovery cohort and PCL second replication cohort: Study participants were recruited through the PCL network consisting of 14 institutions from 7 countries: Switzerland, Italy, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands.Canadian children replication cohort: participants were recruited via the Canadian Pharmacogenomics Network for Drug Safety (CPNDS), a national research and patients care network established to reduce serious adverse drug reactions in children.Data for this study was collected prospectively as well as retrospectively. Selection bias could have occurred in the retrospective collection of data. As a result of missing or unclassifiable audiograms, some patients could not be included due to a missing phenotype. Because many of the patients with missing audiograms might have had good hearing function, they might therefore no longer had follow-up(s) for audiometric testing, As a consequence, the odds of ototoxicity based on the results of this study could have been slightly overestimated.Date of data collection: January 2015 to October 2017 Geographic location: Netherlands; Canada; Germany<br><b>Data access</b>Summary statistics from GWAS analyses of participant blood and saliva samples (Meijer_01032021_cisplatin_induced_hearing_loss.tsv) are openly available from the GWAS Catalog: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/studies/GCST90013831.<br>Gene expression profiling data from mouse tissues in response to cisplatin treatment, are openly available from Gene Expression Omnibus: https://identifiers.org/geo:GSE117167.<br>Further data from this study cannot be made openly available due to restrictions based on privacy regulations and informed consent of the participants in Europe and Canada. Requests for data access should be sent to the principal investigator of each cohort.<br><b>Corresponding authors for this study</b>MM van den Heuvel-Eibrink (m.m.vandenheuvel-eibrink@prinsesmaximacentrum.nl) – PCL discovery cohortBruce Carleton (bcarleton@popi.ubc.ca) – Canadian replication cohortOliver Zolk (Oliver.Zolk@mhb-fontane.de) – PCL replication cohortAndries Nagtegaal (a.nagtegaal@erasmusmc.nl) - CHARGE cohort<br><b>Study approval </b>The PanCareLIFE study was approved by the local ethics committees:• Kantonale Ethikkommission Bern, 362/2015• Comitate Etico Regionale, 507REG2014• Ethical Committee University Hospital Brno, June 11, 2016• Ethics Committee Fakultni Nemocnice v Motole Prague, EK-1447/14• De Videnskabsetiske Komiteer Region Hovedstaden, H-1-2014-125• Ethikkommission Medizinische Universität Graz, 27-015 ex 14/15• Ethikkommission der Universität Ulm, 160/17• Ethikkommission der Universität zu Lübeck, 14/181• Ethik-Kommission der Ärztekammer Westfalen-Lippe und der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 2014-619• Medische Ethische Toetsings Commissie Erasmus MC, MEC-2014-633• Medisch Ethische Toetsingscommissie, 2015_202<br>European Union Seventh Framework Programme (602030)<br>CPNDS studies were approved by the Canadian Research Ethics Board (i H04-70358)<br>All participants provided written informed consent to participate in the study and to have their information obtained from treating physicians.<br>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,119 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».