Loss of Heterozygosity at the<i>BRCA1</i>and<i>BRCA2</i>Loci Detected in Ductal Lavage Fluid from<i>BRCA</i>Gene Mutation Carriers and Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Female BRCA gene mutation carriers are at increased risk for developing breast cancer. Ductal lavage is a novel method for sampling breast ductal fluid, providing epithelial cells for cytologic assessment and a source of free DNA for molecular analyses. Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the BRCA loci in ductal lavage fluid is a potential biomarker of breast cancer risk. The LOH rate was measured at the BRCA1/2 loci and compared with that at a control locus (APC) using free DNA from the ductal lavage fluid of BRCA carriers and predictive test negative controls. We evaluated the reproducibility of these analyses. Free DNA sufficient for PCR amplification was obtained from 33 ductal lavage samples of 17 healthy women of known BRCA status (14 BRCA carriers and 3 controls). LOH rates of 36.4% to 56.3% at the BRCA1 locus and 45% to 61.5% at the BRCA2 locus were found among BRCA carriers. The LOH rate at the APC locus was lower (18.5%). The interaliquot reproducibility for the D17S855 marker of the BRCA1 locus was 66.7%. Intraaliquot reproducibility was 90%. Although we successfully isolated sufficient free DNA from ductal lavage fluid for PCR amplification, the degree of reproducibility of these LOH studies raises questions about the robustness of this technique as a risk assessment tool in the evaluation of high-risk women. Further studies are required to evaluate the specificity and predictive value of LOH in ductal lavage fluid for breast cancer development.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".