MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genes implicated in hereditary breast cancer syndromes

2000· review· en· W2114586605 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia N. Tonin

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Surgical Oncology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineLi–Fraumeni syndromeCancerOvarian cancerBRCA2 ProteinPTENGenetic counselingDiseaseCancer syndromeGermline mutationOncologyMutationCancer researchInternal medicineGeneGeneticsBiologyPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The medical histories of breast cancer-prone families have been described for over a century. The pattern of breast cancer occurrences in these families is most consistent with an autosomal dominant mode of inheritance. The location of a gene that could explain the pattern of transmission of the breast cancer trait in families averaging early (pre-menopausal) onset of breast cancer was reported in 1990. Since then, two genes have been identified: BRCA1 and BRCA2. Germ-line mutations in these two genes confer susceptibility to breast (female and male) and ovarian cancer, and account for a significant proportion of hereditary breast cancer in two cancer syndromes: site-specific breast cancer and the breast-ovarian cancer syndrome. Other hereditary syndromes that feature breast cancer are Li-Fraumeni syndrome, Cowden disease, and ataxia telangiectasia, whose carriers have been shown to harbor germ-line mutations in TP53, PTEN, and ATM, respectively. There may be other genetic factors that contribute to hereditary breast cancer, since not all families with multiple cases of breast cancer harbor germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Host factors (such as lifestyle choices) and other genes may modulate risk of breast cancer in mutation carriers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Surgical OncologySame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207