MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132798572 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605279

The TP53 Arg72Pro and MDM2 309G>T polymorphisms are not associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

2009· article· en· W2132798572 on OpenAlexafffund
Olga M. Sinilnikova, Antonis C. Antoniou, Jacques Simard, Sue Healey, Mélanie Léoné, Daniel Sinnett, Amanda B. Spurdle, J. Beesley, X Chen, Mark H. Greene, Jennifer T. Loud, Flavio Lejbkowicz, Gad Rennert, Sara Dishon, Irene L. Andrulis, Susan M. Domchek, Katherine L. Nathanson, Siranoush Manoukian, Paolo Radice, Irene Konstantopoulou, Ignacio Blanco, A.L. Laborde, M. Durán, Ana Osório, Javier Benı́tez, Ute Hamann, Frans B.L. Hogervorst, Theo A.M. van Os, S. Peock, Mark Cook, Craig Luccarini, D. Gareth Evans, Fiona Lalloo, Rosalind A. Eeles, Gabriella Pichert, R Davidson, T Cole, Jackie Cook, J. Paterson, C Brewer, David J. Hughes, Isabelle Coupier, Sophie Giraud, Florence Coulet, Chrystelle Colas, Florent Soubrier, Étienne Rouleau, Ivan Bièche, Rosette Lidereau, Liliane Demange, Catherine Noguès, Henry T. Lynch, Rita K. Schmutzler, Beatrix Versmold, Christoph Engel, A Meindl, Norbert Arnold, Christian Sutter, Heidrun L. Deissler, D Schaefer, Ursula G. Froster, Kristiina Aittomäki, Heli Nevanlinna, Lesley McGuffog, Douglas F. Easton, Georgia Chenevix‐Trench, Dominique Stoppa‐Lyonnet

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of TorontoCancer Care OntarioCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónNational Breast Cancer FoundationNational Cancer InstituteKWF KankerbestrijdingNational Institutes of HealthNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UKDeutsche KrebshilfeCancer Care OntarioRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumHelsingin ja Uudenmaan Sairaanhoitopiiri
KeywordsBreast cancerSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypeSNPOncologyHazard ratioInternal medicineCarcinogenesisMedicineAlleleCancerConfidence intervalGeneticsBiologyCancer researchGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The TP53 pathway, in which TP53 and its negative regulator MDM2 are the central elements, has an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly in BRCA1- and BRCA2-mediated carcinogenesis. A single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of MDM2 (309T>G, rs2279744) and a coding SNP of TP53 (Arg72Pro, rs1042522) have been shown to be of functional significance. METHODS: To investigate whether these SNPs modify breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we pooled genotype data on the TP53 Arg72Pro SNP in 7011 mutation carriers and on the MDM2 309T>G SNP in 2222 mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Data were analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model within a retrospective likelihood framework. RESULTS: No association was found between these SNPs and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 (TP53: per-allele hazard ratio (HR)=1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-1.10, P(trend)=0.77; MDM2: HR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.84-1.09, P(trend)=0.54) or for BRCA2 mutation carriers (TP53: HR=0.99, 95%CI: 0.87-1.12, P(trend)=0.83; MDM2: HR=0.98, 95%CI: 0.80-1.21, P(trend)=0.88). We also evaluated the potential combined effects of both SNPs on breast cancer risk, however, none of their combined genotypes showed any evidence of association. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence that TP53 Arg72Pro or MDM2 309T>G, either singly or in combination, influence breast cancer risk in BRCA1 or 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207