MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027056052 · doi:10.1182/blood-2004-06-2161

Genetic variation in XPD predicts treatment outcome and risk of acute myeloid leukemia following chemotherapy

2004· article· en· W2027056052 on OpenAlexfundno aff
James M. Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity College LondonMedical Research CouncilKay Kendall Leukaemia FundUniversity of OxfordYork University
KeywordsMyeloid leukemiaMedicineChemotherapy regimenOncologyInternal medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) gene encodes a DNA helicase that functions in nucleotide excision repair of chemotherapy-induced DNA damage, the efficiency of which is predicted to be affected by a lysine to glutamine variant at codon 751. We hypothesized that this constitutive genetic variant may modify clinical response to chemotherapy, and we have examined its association with outcome following chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in 341 elderly patients entered into the United Kingdom Medical Research Council AML 11 trial, and with the risk of developing chemotherapy-related AML. Among subjects treated for AML, disease-free survival at one year was 44% for lysine homozygotes, compared with 36% for heterozygotes and 16% for glutamine homozygotes (hazard ratio [HR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.70; P = .04). Similarly, overall survival at one year was 38% for lysine homozygotes, 35% for heterozygotes, and 23% for glutamine homozygotes (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.99-1.41; P = .07). Furthermore, homozygosity for the XPD codon 751 glutamine variant was associated with a significantly increased risk of developing AML after chemotherapy (odds ratio, 2.22 for Gln/Gln vs Lys/Lys; 95% CI, 1.04-4.74). These data suggest that the XPD codon 751 glutamine variant protects against myeloid cell death after chemotherapy.

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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations115
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207