MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032843495 · doi:10.1186/bcr1902

Accurate prediction of BRCA1 and BRCA2 heterozygous genotypes using expression profiling of lymphocytes after irradiation-induced DNA damage

2008· article· en· W2032843495 on OpenAlexaff
Zsofia Kote‐Jarai, Sarah Jugurnauth, L. Matthews, Ian Giddings, Elizabeth Bancroft, Richard D. Williams, Mark Girolami, Colin Campbell, Rosalind A. Eeles

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersNational Cancer InstituteBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilAllerganKeele UniversityMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorTenovusBreast Cancer CampaignBreast Cancer Research TrustWorld Cancer Research FundUniversity of SheffieldNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UKEuropean CommissionRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustJohn and Lucille Van Geest FoundationUniversity of BristolUniversity of GlasgowLudwig Institute for Cancer ResearchAstraZeneca
KeywordsSurgical oncologyDNA damageGenotypeGene expression profilingDNA profilingDNA repairBiologyGeneticsCancer researchDNAMedicineGene expressionOncologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes predispose women to an increased risk of breast/ovarian cancer. Both genes have important roles in DNA damage repair and are implicated in gene expression regulation. We have previously shown that normal fibroblasts from mutation carriers can be distinguished from noncarriers following radiation-induced DNA damage. In this new study we used lymphocytes to determine whether these also show differential response to induced DNA damage and whether expression profiling using microarray technology could be used to accurately predict the BRCA genotype. Short-term lymphocyte cultures were established from fresh blood samples from 20 BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 mutation carriers and from 10 negative controls (individuals tested negative for the mutation present in the family). Lymphocytes were subjected to 8 Gy ionizing irradiation to induce DNA damage and RNA was extracted 1 hour post γ-irradiation. For expression profiling, genome-wide (30 K) spotted cDNA microarrays manufactured by the Cancer Research UK Microarray Facility were used. We then applied the support vector machine (SVM) classifier with statistical feature selection to determine the best feature set for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 heterozygous genotypes. We also investigated the prediction accuracy using a nonprobabilistic classifier (SVM) and a probabilistic classifier (Gaussian process classifier).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer ResearchSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207