MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151463929 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.801.13.5

Identifying Functional Genetic Variants in DNA Repair Pathway Using Protein Conservation Analysis

2004· article· en· W2151463929 on OpenAlexaff
Sevtap Savas, David Y. Kim, Mohd Ahmad, Mehjabeen Shariff, Hilmi Özçelik

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneticsBiologyXRCC1DNA repairSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of DNA repair in initiation, promotion, and progression of malignancy suggests that variations in DNA repair genes confer altered cancer risk. Accordingly, DNA repair gene variants have been studied extensively in the context of cancer predisposition. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are the most common genetic variations in the human genome. A fraction of SNPs are located within the genes, which are likely to alter the gene expression and function. SNPs that change the encoded amino acid sequence of the proteins (non-synonymous; nsSNPs) are potentially genetic disease determinant variations. However, as not all amino acid substitutions are supposed to lead to a change in protein function, it will be necessary to have a priori prediction and determination of the functional consequences of amino acid substitutions per se, and then together with other genetic and environmental factors to study their possible association with a trait. Here we report the analysis of nsSNPs in 88 DNA repair genes and their functional evaluation based on the conservation of amino acids among the protein family members. Our analysis demonstrated that >30% of variants of DNA repair proteins are highly likely to affect the function of the proteins drastically. In this study, we have shown that three nsSNPs, which were predicted to have functional consequences (XRCC1-R399Q, XRCC3-T241M, XRCC1-R280H), were already found to be associated with cancer risk. The strategy developed and applied in this study has the potential to identify functional protein variants of DNA repair pathway that may be associated with cancer predisposition.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations114
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207