MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131430783 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djk095

MLH1 -93G>A Promoter Polymorphism and the Risk of Microsatellite-Unstable Colorectal Cancer

2007· article· en· W2131430783 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Stavroula Raptis, Miralem Mrkonjic, R. C. Green, Vaijayanti Pethe, Neerav Monga, Y. M. Chan, Darshana Daftary, Elizabeth Dicks, Ban Younghusband, Patrick S. Parfrey, Steve Gallinger, John McLaughlin, Julia A. Knight, Bharati Bapat

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of NewfoundlandCancer Care OntarioMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of TorontoAmerican Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsMLH1Microsatellite instabilityColorectal cancerMSH2Internal medicineDNA mismatch repairOncologyBiologyOdds ratioConfidence intervalPenetranceGeneticsGastroenterologyAlleleCancerMicrosatelliteMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although up to 30% of patients with colorectal cancer have a positive family history of colorectal neoplasia, few colorectal cancers can be explained by mutations in high-penetrance genes. We investigated whether polymorphisms in DNA mismatch repair genes are associated with the risk of colorectal cancer. METHODS: We genotyped 929 case patients and 1098 control subjects from Ontario and 430 case patients and 275 control subjects from Newfoundland and Labrador for five polymorphisms in the mismatch repair genes MLH1 and MSH2 with the fluorogenic 5' nuclease assay. Tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) was determined with a polymerase chain reaction-based method; MSI status was assigned as high (MSI-H, > or = 30% unstable markers among all markers tested), low (MSI-L, <30% markers unstable), or stable (MSS, no unstable markers). We used unconditional logistic regression to evaluate the association between each polymorphism and colorectal cancer after adjusting for age and sex. The associations between polymorphisms and tumor clinicopathologic features were evaluated with a Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's exact test. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: We observed strong associations between the MLH1 -93G>A polymorphism and MSI-H tumors among case patients from Ontario (P = .001) and Newfoundland (P = .003). When compared with the control populations, homozygosity for the MLH1 -93G>A variant allele was associated with MSI-H tumors among case patients in Ontario (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65 to 6.30) and in Newfoundland (OR = 8.88, 95% CI = 2.33 to 33.9), as was heterozygosity among case patients in Ontario (OR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.20 to 2.83) and in Newfoundland (OR = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.14 to 5.75). Genotype frequencies were similar among case patients with MSS and MSI-L tumors and control subjects, and the majority of homozygous variant carriers had MSS tumors. Among case patients from Ontario, an association between the MLH1 -93G>A polymorphism and a strong family history of colorectal cancer (for Amsterdam criteria I and II, P = .004 and P = .02, respectively) was observed. CONCLUSION: In two patient populations, the MLH1 -93G>A polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of MSI-H colorectal cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations118
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207