The<i>AIB1</i>Polyglutamine Repeat Does Not Modify Breast Cancer Risk in<i>BRCA1</i>and<i>BRCA2</i>Mutation Carriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is by far the largest study of its kind to date, and further suggests that AIB1 does not play a substantial role in modifying the phenotype of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. The AIB1 gene encodes the AIB1/SRC-3 steroid hormone receptor coactivator, and amplification of the gene and/or protein occurs in breast and ovarian tumors. A CAG/CAA repeat length polymorphism encodes a stretch of 17 to 29 glutamines in the HR-interacting carboxyl-terminal region of the protein which is somatically unstable in tumor tissues and cell lines. There is conflicting evidence regarding the role of this polymorphism as a modifier of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. To further evaluate the evidence for an association between AIB1 glutamine repeat length and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we have genotyped this polymorphism in 1,090 BRCA1 and 661 BRCA2 mutation carriers from Australia, Europe, and North America. There was no evidence for an increased risk associated with AIB1 glutamine repeat length. Given the large sample size, with more than adequate power to detect previously reported effects, we conclude that the AIB1 glutamine repeat does not substantially modify risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".