MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512691487 · doi:10.1002/pbc.24505

Validation of variants in<i>SLC28A3</i>and<i>UGT1A6</i>as genetic markers predictive of anthracycline‐induced cardiotoxicity in children

2013· article· en· W1512691487 on OpenAlexafffund
Henk Visscher, Colin J.D. Ross, Shahrad R. Rassekh, G Sándor, H.N. Caron, Elvira C van Dalen, Leontien C.M. Kremer, Heleen J. van der Pal, Paul Rogers, Michael Rieder, Bruce Carleton, Michael R. Hayden

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCohortCardiotoxicityOncologyAnthracyclineInternal medicineOdds ratioCohort studyReplication (statistics)ChemotherapyCancerBreast cancerVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of anthracyclines as effective antineoplastic drugs is limited by the occurrence of cardiotoxicity. Multiple genetic variants predictive of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (ACT) in children were recently identified. The current study was aimed to assess replication of these findings in an independent cohort of children. PROCEDURE: . Twenty-three variants were tested for association with ACT in an independent cohort of 218 patients. Predictive models including genetic and clinical risk factors were constructed in the original cohort and assessed in the current replication cohort. RESULTS: . We confirmed the association of rs17863783 in UGT1A6 and ACT in the replication cohort (P = 0.0062, odds ratio (OR) 7.98). Additional evidence for association of rs7853758 (P = 0.058, OR 0.46) and rs885004 (P = 0.058, OR 0.42) in SLC28A3 was found (combined P = 1.6 × 10(-5) and P = 3.0 × 10(-5), respectively). A previously constructed prediction model did not significantly improve risk prediction in the replication cohort over clinical factors alone. However, an improved prediction model constructed using replicated genetic variants as well as clinical factors discriminated significantly better between cases and controls than clinical factors alone in both original (AUC 0.77 vs. 0.68, P = 0.0031) and replication cohort (AUC 0.77 vs. 0.69, P = 0.060). CONCLUSIONS: . We validated genetic variants in two genes predictive of ACT in an independent cohort. A prediction model combining replicated genetic variants as well as clinical risk factors might be able to identify high- and low-risk patients who could benefit from alternative treatment options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations198
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigationFrench-language works237,207