Significant association of XPD codon 312 single nucleotide polymorphism with bladder cancer susceptibility in Taiwan.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The DNA repair gene xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD), an important caretaker of the overall genome stability, is thought to play a major role in the development of human malignancy. Polymorphic variants of XPD, at codon 312 (rs1799793), 751 (rs13181) and promoter-114 (rs3810366), were chosen to be studied for their association with bladder cancer susceptibility in a central Taiwanese population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this hospital-based case-control study, bladder cancer patients (308) and age- and gender-matched healthy controls (308) were recruited and their genotypes were analyzed by a polymerase chain reaction-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method. RESULTS: A significant difference in the frequency of the XPD codon 312 genotype, but not the XPD codon 751 or promoter-114 genotypes, was found between the bladder cancer and control groups. Those who had G/A or A/A at XPD codon 312 showed a 1.85-fold (95% confidence interval=1.34-2.56) increased risk of bladder cancer compared to those with G/G. As for XPD codon 312 and promoter-114, there was no difference in distribution between the bladder cancer and control groups. CONCLUSION: The heterozygous and homozygous A allele of the XPD codon 312 may be responsible for bladder carcinogenesis and useful in the early detection and prediction of bladder 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".