DNA repair gene XRCC1 and XPD polymorphisms and risk of lung cancer in a Chinese population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 (XRCC1) and xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) are mainly involved in base excision repair (BER) and nucleotide excision repair (NER) of DNA repair pathways, respectively. Polymorphisms of DNA repair gene XRCC1 and XPD has recently been identified, and there is a growing body of evidence that these polymorphisms may have some phenotypic significance. To investigate the role of XRCC1 polymorphisms (codon 194 and codon 399) and XPD polymorphism (codon 751) in lung cancer, a population-based case-control study of 109 lung cancer patients and 109 healthy control subjects (individually matched on age and gender) in a Chinese population was conducted. XRCC1 and XPD genotypes were identified using PCR-restriction fragments length polymorphism technique. Conditional logistic regression analysis revealed that XRCC1 codon 194Trp/Trp genotype was associated with a borderline increased risk of lung cancer [adjusted odd ratio (OR) = 3.06; confidence interval (CI) 0.94-9.92]. The XPD 751 Lys allele (combined Lys/Lys and Lys/Gln genotypes) was associated with a significantly increased risk of lung cancer (OR = 3.19; CI 1.01-10.07). The risk of lung cancer increased more than additive interaction (adjusted OR = 8.77; CI 1.47-52.31) for the individuals with both putative high-risk genotypes of XRCC1 194 Trp/Trp and XPD 751 Lys allele. Our results suggested that the genotypes of XRCC1 194Trp/Trp and XPD 751 Lys allele might be the risk genotypes for lung cancer in Chinese population.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".