MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131906164 · doi:10.1136/jmg.2006.043802

Features associated with germline CDKN2A mutations: a GenoMEL study of melanoma-prone families from three continents

2006· article· en· W2131906164 on OpenAlexaff
May Chan, Mark Harland, Nicholas K. Hayward, Florence Démenais, D. Timothy Bishop, Esther Azizi, Giovanna Bianchi‐Scarrà, William Bruno, Donato Calista, Lisa Cannon‐Albright, Valérie Chaudru, Agnès Chompret, Paola Ghiorzo, Elizabeth M. Gillanders, Nelleke A. Gruis, Johan Hansson, David Hogg, Peter A. Kanetsky, Richard Kefford, M.T. Landi, Julie Lang, Sancy A. Leachman, R.M. MacKie, Veronica Magnusson, Graham J. Mann, Julia Newton‐Bishop, Jane M. Palmer, Susana Puig, Joan A. Puig‐Butille, Mitchell Stark, Hensin Tsao, M. A. Tucker, Emanuel Yakobson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Genetics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Australia
KeywordsCDKN2APancreatic cancerGermline mutationMelanomaIncidence (geometry)MedicineCancerDemographyOncologyInternal medicineMutationGeneticsBiologyCancer researchGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The major factors individually reported to be associated with an increased frequency of CDKN2A mutations are increased number of patients with melanoma in a family, early age at melanoma diagnosis, and family members with multiple primary melanomas (MPM) or pancreatic cancer. METHODS: These four features were examined in 385 families with > or =3 patients with melanoma pooled by 17 GenoMEL groups, and these attributes were compared across continents. RESULTS: Overall, 39% of families had CDKN2A mutations ranging from 20% (32/162) in Australia to 45% (29/65) in North America to 57% (89/157) in Europe. All four features in each group, except pancreatic cancer in Australia (p = 0.38), individually showed significant associations with CDKN2A mutations, but the effects varied widely across continents. Multivariate examination also showed different predictors of mutation risk across continents. In Australian families, > or =2 patients with MPM, median age at melanoma diagnosis < or =40 years and > or =6 patients with melanoma in a family jointly predicted the mutation risk. In European families, all four factors concurrently predicted the risk, but with less stringent criteria than in Australia. In North American families, only > or =1 patient with MPM and age at diagnosis < or =40 years simultaneously predicted the mutation risk. CONCLUSIONS: The variation in CDKN2A mutations for the four features across continents is consistent with the lower melanoma incidence rates in Europe and higher rates of sporadic melanoma in Australia. The lack of a pancreatic cancer-CDKN2A mutation relationship in Australia probably reflects the divergent spectrum of mutations in families from Australia versus those from North America and Europe. GenoMEL is exploring candidate host, genetic and/or environmental risk factors to better understand the variation observed.

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)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations475
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical GeneticsSame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207