A founder <i>BRCA2</i> mutation in non‐Afrikaner breast cancer patients of the Western Cape of South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Founder mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in many different populations. We studied 105 Coloured and 16 Black Xhosa women residing in the Western Cape of South Africa diagnosed with breast cancer. We screened these patients using our standard panel of six previously reported SA Afrikaner and Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/2 mutations and identified only two Afrikaner mutations. Further screening by the protein truncation test (BRCA1 exon 11, and BRCA2 exons 10 and 11) revealed an additional four deleterious mutations (BRCA1 c.1504_ 1508del,p.Leu502AlafsX2, BRCA2 c.2826_2829del,p.Ile943LysfsX16, c.6447_6448dup,p.Lys2150IlefsX19 and c.5771_5774del,p.Ile1924Argfs X38). The latter, also known in Breast Cancer Information Core nomenclature as 5999del4, was identified in 4 of 105 (3.8%) Coloureds and 4 of 16 (25%) Xhosa women, which makes it a frequent founder mutation in the Western Cape Province. Although this mutation was previously reported to occur in the Netherlands, haplotype analysis indicated two distinct origins for the Dutch and South African mutations, excluding the possibility of a common Dutch ancestor and suggesting gene flow from the indigenous tribes such as the Xhosa to the Coloured population instead. Further studies to determine the carrier rate of this variant in the Xhosa and other SA populations are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".