Epistatic Relationship between the Cancer Susceptibility Genes <i>CHEK2</i> and <i>p27</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the effects of p27 and CHEK2 variants on prostate and colon cancer risk in a case-control study. Modest effects on prostate cancer risk were observed for both CHEK2 missense and truncating variants. However, the excess cancer risk was restricted to the subgroup of men who were homozygous for the VV genotype in codon 109 of the p27 gene. Among men with the VV p27 genotype, the odds ratios associated with truncating and missense CHEK2 mutations were 3.1 (P < 0.0001) and 1.9 (P < 0.0001), respectively. Among men with other p27 genotypes (GG and VG), the odds ratios were 1.5 and 1.2 for truncating and missense CHEK2 mutations, respectively, and were not statistically significant. The interaction between CHEK2 and p27 was confirmed in a group of patients with colon cancer. Thus, it seems that the clinical expression of CHEK2 variant alleles on prostate and colon cancer risk may be restricted to individuals with a specific genotype (VV) of the p27 gene. Two-gene models provide numerous challenges for gene identification and cancer risk assessment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".