MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>BRCA1</i> and <i>BRCA2</i> mutations among familial breast cancer patients from Costa Rica

2011· article· en· W2020473829 on OpenAlexaff
GA Gutiérrez Espeleta, M Llacuachaqui, Lourdes García‐Jiménez, Mercedes Herrera, Kenneth Loáiciga Vega, Adolfo Ortiz Barboza, Robert E. Royer, S Li, SA Narod

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerFamily historyCancerMutationOncologyMedicineInternal medicineBRCA2 ProteinGeneticsGynecologyGeneBiologyGermline mutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution of mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to the burden of breast cancer in Costa Rica has not been studied. We estimated the frequency of BRCA mutations among 111 Costa Rican women with breast cancer and a family history of breast cancer. These women were mainly from the metropolitan area of San José. A detailed family history was obtained from each patient and a blood sample was processed for DNA extraction. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were sought using a combination of techniques and all mutations were confirmed by direct sequencing. Four different mutations were identified in five patients (four in BRCA2 and one in BRCA1) representing 4.5% of the total. Two unrelated patients were found to have a BRCA2 5531delTT mutation. Other BRCA2 mutations included C5507G and 6174delT. Only one BRCA1 mutation was found (C3522T). The family with the BRCA1 mutation had five cases of gastric cancer. Families with BRCA2 mutations were also reported to have cases of gastric and prostate cancers; however, the full range of cancers associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Costa Rica has not yet been established.

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)0.000
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations29
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GeneticsSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207