MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1506338733

Genes involved in DNA repair are mutational targets in endometrial cancers with microsatellite instability.

2002· article· en· W1506338733 on OpenAlexaff
Vessela Vassileva, Anna Millar, Laurent Briollais, William Chapman, Bharati Bapat

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosatellite instabilityDNA mismatch repairFrameshift mutationBiologyCancer researchDNA repairGeneMutationGermline mutationGenome instabilityDNA damageGeneticsCarcinogenesisMicrosatelliteDNA
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is observed in a subset of endometrial cancers (ECs) and is attributed to defects in mismatch repair. Mismatch repair deficiency allows for accumulation of mutations in the coding repeats of key target genes, which may be involved in the initiation and progression of MSI+ EC. We examined genes implicated in DNA repair pathways in 38 MSI-high (MSI-H), 10 MSI-low, 25 microsatellite stable ECs, and a selected panel of associated premalignant hyperplasias. Genetic alterations were correlated to histopathological data, including tumor grade and stage. Somatic frameshift mutations were observed in hMLH3, hMSH3, hMSH6, CHK1, and BAX genes in MSI-H endometrial hyperplasias and cancers, whereas mutations in ATR and CDC25C were observed only in MSI-H ECs. Increased mutation frequency in DNA damage response pathway genes including ATR, CHK1, and BAX demonstrated a significant trend with advancing tumor grade (P < 0.05). Our observations of the same mutations at short coding mononucleotide repeats in both premalignant lesions and tumors and association of increased frequency of mutation accumulation with advancing tumor grade suggest that these alterations may play a role in the development and progression of MSI+ EC.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations107
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207