Predictive Value of XPD Polymorphisms on Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The correlation between xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) polymorphisms (Lys751Gln and Asp312Asn) and clinical outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, who received platinum-based chemotherapy (Pt-chemotherapy), is still inconclusive. This meta-analysis was aimed to systematically review published evidence and ascertain the exact role of XPD polymorphisms. METHODS: Databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to April 2013 to identify eligible studies. A rigorous quality assessment of eligible studies was conducted according the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scales. The relationship between XPD polymorphisms and response to Pt-chemotherapy and survival was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 22 eligible studies were included and analyzed in this meta-analysis. The overall analysis suggested that the XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism was not associated with response to Pt-chemotherapy or survival. However, the XPD 312Asn allele was significantly associated with poor response to Pt-chemotherapy compared with the Asp312 allele (Asn vs. Asp: OR = 0.435, 95% CI: 0.261-0.726). Additionally, the variant genotype of XPD Asp312Asn polymorphism was associated with favorable survival in Caucasian (AspAsn vs. AspAsp: HR = 0.781, 95% CI: 0.619-0.986) but unfavorable survival in Asian (AspAsn+AsnAsn vs. AspAsp: HR = 1.550, 95% CI: 1.038-2.315). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that XPD Asp312Asn polymorphism may function as a predictive biomarker on platinum-based chemotherapy in NSCLC and further studies are warranted.
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 | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".