Prevalence of founder mutations in the <scp>BRCA1</scp> and <scp>BRCA2</scp> genes among unaffected women from the Bahamas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population-based testing for BRCA1/2 mutations detects a high proportion of carriers not identified by cancer family history-based testing. We sought to determine whether population-based testing is an effective approach to genetic testing in the Bahamas, where 23% of women with breast cancer carry one of seven founder mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene. We determined the prevalence of founder BRCA mutations in 1847 Bahamian women without a personal history of breast or ovarian cancer, unselected for age or family history. We found that 2.8% (20/705) of unaffected women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer and 0.09% (1/1089) of unaffected women without a family history carry a BRCA mutation. A total of 38% of unaffected women with a known mutation in the family were found to carry the familial mutation. We previously suggested that all Bahamian women with breast or ovarian cancer be offered genetic testing. These current data suggest that additionally all unaffected Bahamian women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer should be offered genetic testing for the founder BRCA mutations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".