MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154436990 · doi:10.1007/s10549-012-2295-y

The HOXB13 p.Gly84Glu mutation is not associated with the risk of breast cancer

2012· article· en· W2154436990 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohammad R. Akbari, Wojciech Kluźniak, Rachelle Rodin, Song Li, Dominika Wokołorczyk, Robert E. Royer, Aniruddh Kashyap, Janusz Menkiszak, Jan Lubiński, Steven A. Narod, Cezary Cybulski

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Research and Treatment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical School, University of MichiganUniversity of Michigan
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineOncologyInternal medicineGermline mutationCancerMutationFamily historyTamoxifenProstate cancerGeneGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the HOXB13 gene has been shown to be a susceptibility gene for prostate cancer. HOXB13 is overexpressed in breast cancer tissues and HOXB13 expression in combination with low expression of IL17BR is predictive for a tamoxifen response in ER-positive breast cancers. Based on observations, we hypothesized that the HOXB13 p.Gly84Glu mutation might be associated with breast cancer risk. We genotyped this mutation in the germline DNA of 4,037 women with breast cancer (including 1,082 familial cases) and in 2,762 controls from Canada and Poland. Seven heterozygous carriers of the HOXB13 p.Gly84Glu mutation were found in the cases (0.17 %) compared to four carriers among the controls (0.14 %; OR = 1.2, 95 % CI = 0.34-4.1, p = 1.0). Only one of the seven carriers had a family history of breast cancer. This study does not support the hypothesis that women who carry the HOXB13 Gly84Glu mutation are at increased risk of breast 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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer Research and TreatmentSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207