MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099911321 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djq363

Association of MC1R Variants and Host Phenotypes With Melanoma Risk in CDKN2A Mutation Carriers: A GenoMEL Study

2010· article· en· W2099911321 on OpenAlexaff
Florence Démenais, Hamida Mohamdi, Valérie Chaudru, Alisa M. Goldstein, D. Timothy Bishop, Peter A. Kanetsky, Nicholas K. Hayward, Elizabeth M. Gillanders, David E. Elder, Marie‐Françoise Avril, Esther Azizi, Patricia Van Belle, W. Bergman, Giovanna Bianchi‐Scarrà, Brigitte Bressac–de Paillerets, Donato Calista, Cristina Carrera, Johan Hansson, Mark Harland, David Hogg, Veronica Höiom, Elizabeth A. Holland, Christian Ingvar, M. T. Landi, Julie Lang, R.M. MACKIE, Graham J. Mann, M.E. Ming, Ching-Ni-Jenny Njauw, Håkan Olsson, Jane M. Palmer, Lorenza Pastorino, Susana Puig, Juliette A. Randerson‐Moor, Mitchell Stark, Hensin Tsao, Margaret A. Tucker, Pieter van der Velden, X. R. Yang, Nelleke A. Gruis

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UK
KeywordsCDKN2AMelanocortin 1 receptorMelanomaGermline mutationPenetranceGeneticsOdds ratioBiologyPhenotypeMutationCancer researchMedicineCancerInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Carrying the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) germline mutations is associated with a high risk for melanoma. Penetrance of CDKN2A mutations is modified by pigmentation characteristics, nevus phenotypes, and some variants of the melanocortin-1 receptor gene (MC1R), which is known to have a role in the pigmentation process. However, investigation of the associations of both MC1R variants and host phenotypes with melanoma risk has been limited. METHODS: We included 815 CDKN2A mutation carriers (473 affected, and 342 unaffected, with melanoma) from 186 families from 15 centers in Europe, North America, and Australia who participated in the Melanoma Genetics Consortium. In this family-based study, we assessed the associations of the four most frequent MC1R variants (V60L, V92M, R151C, and R160W) and the number of variants (1, ≥2 variants), alone or jointly with the host phenotypes (hair color, propensity to sunburn, and number of nevi), with melanoma risk in CDKN2A mutation carriers. These associations were estimated and tested using generalized estimating equations. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Carrying any one of the four most frequent MC1R variants (V60L, V92M, R151C, R160W) in CDKN2A mutation carriers was associated with a statistically significantly increased risk for melanoma across all continents (1.24 × 10(-6) ≤ P ≤ .0007). A consistent pattern of increase in melanoma risk was also associated with increase in number of MC1R variants. The risk of melanoma associated with at least two MC1R variants was 2.6-fold higher than the risk associated with only one variant (odds ratio = 5.83 [95% confidence interval = 3.60 to 9.46] vs 2.25 [95% confidence interval = 1.44 to 3.52]; P(trend) = 1.86 × 10(-8)). The joint analysis of MC1R variants and host phenotypes showed statistically significant associations of melanoma risk, together with MC1R variants (.0001 ≤ P ≤ .04), hair color (.006 ≤ P ≤ .06), and number of nevi (6.9 × 10(-6) ≤ P ≤ .02). CONCLUSION: Results show that MC1R variants, hair color, and number of nevi were jointly associated with melanoma risk in CDKN2A mutation carriers. This joint association may have important consequences for risk assessments in familial settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations119
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207