MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997180190 · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.07.107

ABCB1 (MDR1) polymorphisms and ovarian cancer progression and survival: A comprehensive analysis from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium and The Cancer Genome Atlas

2013· article· en· W1997180190 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sharon E. Johnatty, Jonathan Beesley, Bo Gao, Yi Lu, Matthew H. Law, Michelle J. Henderson, Amanda J. Russell, Ellen L. Hedditch, Catherine Emmanuel, Sián Fereday, Penelope M. Webb, Ellen L. Goode, Robert A. Vierkant, Brooke L. Fridley, Julie M. Cunningham, Peter A. Fasching, Matthias W. Beckmann, Arif B. Ekici, Estrid Høgdall, Susanne K. Kjær, Allan Jensen, Claus Høgdall, Robert Brown, Sandrina Lambrechts, Evelyn Despierre, Ignace Vergote, Jenny Lester, Beth Y. Karlan, Florian Heitz, Andreas du Bois, Philipp Harter, Ira Schwaab, Yukie T. Bean, Tanja Pejović, Douglas A. Levine, Marc T. Goodman, M Camey, Pamela J. Thompson, Galina Lurie, Joellen Shildkraut, Andrew Berchuck, Kathryn L. Terry, Daniel W. Cramer, Murray D. Norris, Michelle Haber, Stuart MacGregor, Anna DeFazio, Georgia Chenevix‐Trench

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research and Materiel CommandCancer Council Western AustraliaCancer Council QueenslandCancer Council VictoriaCancer Council South AustraliaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of New South WalesCancer Council TasmaniaOvarian Cancer Research FundNational Institutes of HealthCancer Council NSWNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UKKræftens BekæmpelseGénome QuébecMcGill UniversityBreast Cancer Research FoundationU.S. Department of DefenseNational Cancer InstituteEntertainment Industry Foundation
KeywordsOvarian cancerMedicineOncologyGenome-wide association studyInternal medicineCancerSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneticsGenotypeGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: ABCB1 encodes the multi-drug efflux pump P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and has been implicated in multi-drug resistance. We comprehensively evaluated this gene and flanking regions for an association with clinical outcome in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: The best candidates from fine-mapping analysis of 21 ABCB1 SNPs tagging C1236T (rs1128503), G2677T/A (rs2032582), and C3435T (rs1045642) were analysed in 4616 European invasive EOC patients from thirteen Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) studies and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Additionally we analysed 1,562 imputed SNPs around ABCB1 in patients receiving cytoreductive surgery and either 'standard' first-line paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy (n=1158) or any first-line chemotherapy regimen (n=2867). We also evaluated ABCB1 expression in primary tumours from 143 EOC patients. RESULT: Fine-mapping revealed that rs1128503, rs2032582, and rs1045642 were the best candidates in optimally debulked patients. However, we observed no significant association between any SNP and either progression-free survival or overall survival in analysis of data from 14 studies. There was a marginal association between rs1128503 and overall survival in patients with nil residual disease (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77-1.01; p=0.07). In contrast, ABCB1 expression in the primary tumour may confer worse prognosis in patients with sub-optimally debulked tumours. CONCLUSION: Our study represents the largest analysis of ABCB1 SNPs and EOC progression and survival to date, but has not identified additional signals, or validated reported associations with progression-free survival for rs1128503, rs2032582, and rs1045642. However, we cannot rule out the possibility of a subtle effect of rs1128503, or other SNPs linked to it, on overall survival.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations63
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueGynecologic OncologySame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207