A high proportion of founder <i>BRCA1</i> mutations in Polish breast cancer families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three mutations in BRCA1 (5382insC, C61G and 4153delA) are common in Poland and account for the majority of mutations identified to date in Polish breast and breast-ovarian cancer families. It is not known, however, to what extent these 3 founder mutations account for all of the BRCA mutations distributed throughout the country. This question has important implications for health policy and the design of epidemiologic studies. To establish the relative contributions of founder and nonfounder BRCA mutations, we established the entire spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a large set of breast-ovarian cancer families with origins in all regions of Poland. We sequenced the entire coding regions of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in 100 Polish families with 3 or more cases of breast cancer and in 100 families with cases of both breast and ovarian cancer. A mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 was detected in 66% of breast cancer families and in 63% of breast-ovarian cancer families. Of 129 mutations, 122 (94.6%) were in BRCA1 and 7 (5.4%) were in BRCA2. Of the 122 families with BRCA1 mutations, 119 (97.5%) had a recurrent mutation (i.e., one that was seen in at least 2 families). In particular, 111 families (91.0%) carried one of the 3 common founder mutations. The mutation spectrum was not different between families with and without ovarian cancer. These findings suggest that a rapid and inexpensive assay directed at identifying the 3 common founder mutations will have a sensitivity of 86% compared to a much more costly and labor-intensive full-sequence analysis of both genes. This rapid test will facilitate large-scale national epidemiologic and clinical studies of hereditary breast cancer, potentially including studies of chemoprevention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".