A meta‐analysis of the association between NQO1 C609T variation and acute myeloid leukemia risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quinone oxidoreductase (NQO1) C609T polymorphisms have been implicated in acute myeloblastic leukemia (AML) risk, but previously published studies are inconsistent and recent meta-analyses have not been adequate. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched. The quality of studies was evaluated by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Crude ORs with 95% CIs were used to assess the strength of association between the NQO1 C609T polymorphisms and AML risk. A total of 14 studies including 2,245 cases and 3,310 controls were involved in this meta-analysis. Overall, significantly elevated AML risk was associated with NQO1 C609T variant genotypes when all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis (TT vs. CC: OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.15-1.81; dominant model: OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.09-1.68). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, significantly increased risks were found for Asians (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.13-1.93, P = 0.005, I(2) = 48.4%, P = 0.071 for heterogeneity). When stratified by studies of adults or children, statistically significantly elevated risks were found among adults (OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.06-1.76, P = 0.017, I(2) = 42.2%, P = 0.097 for heterogeneity). The accumulated evidence indicates that NQO1 C609T seems to confer a risk factor for AML among Asians and adults. Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed, thus more studies based on larger case-control population are required to further evaluate the role of NQO1 C609T polymorphism in AML.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".