MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975562042 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029548

CAG Repeat Variants in the POLG1 Gene Encoding mtDNA Polymerase-Gamma and Risk of Breast Cancer in African-American Women

2012· article· en· W1975562042 on OpenAlexaff
Sami Azrak, Ayyasamy Vanniarajan, Gary Zirpoli, Christine B. Ambrosone, Elisa V. Bandera, Dana H. Bovbjerg, Lina Jandorf, Gregory Ciupak, Warren Davis, Karen Pawlish, Ping Liang, Keshav K. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Public Health ServiceCenters for Disease Control and PreventionState of New Jersey Department of HealthBreast Cancer Research Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerBiologyGeneticsGenotypingMitochondrial DNACancerOdds ratioGenotypeGeneOncologyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The DNA polymerase-gamma (POLG) gene, which encodes the catalytic subunit of enzyme responsible for directing mitochondrial DNA replication in humans, contains a polyglutamine tract encoded by CAG repeats of varying length. The length of the CAG repeat has been associated with the risk of testicular cancer, and other genomic variants that impact mitochondrial function have been linked to breast cancer risk in African-American (AA) women. We evaluated the potential role of germline POLG-CAG repeat variants in breast cancer risk in a sample of AA women (100 cases and 100 age-matched controls) who participated in the Women's Circle of Health Study, an ongoing multi-institutional, case-control study of breast cancer. Genotyping was done by fragment analysis in a blinded manner. Results from this small study suggest the possibility of an increased risk of breast cancer in women with minor CAG repeat variants of POLG, but no statistically significant differences in CAG repeat length were observed between cases and controls (multivariate-adjusted odds ratio 1.74; 95% CI, 0.49-6.21). Our study suggests that POLG-CAG repeat length is a potential risk factor for breast cancer that needs to be explored in larger population-based studies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207