Patients with Systemic Sclerosis Present Increased DNA Damage Differentially Associated with DNA Repair Gene Polymorphisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) exhibit increased toxicity when exposed to genotoxic agents. In our study, we evaluated DNA damage and polymorphic sites in 2 DNA repair genes (XRCC1 Arg399Gln and XRCC4 Ile401Thr) in patients with SSc. METHODS: A total of 177 patients were studied for DNA repair gene polymorphisms. Fifty-six of them were also evaluated for DNA damage in peripheral blood cells using the comet assay. RESULTS: Compared to controls, the patients as a whole or stratified into major clinical variants (limited or diffuse skin involvement), irrespective of the underlying treatment schedule, exhibited increased DNA damage. XRCC1 (rs: 25487) and XRCC4 (rs: 28360135) allele and genotype frequencies observed in patients with SSc were not significantly different from those observed in controls; however, the XRCC1 Arg399Gln allele was associated with increased DNA damage only in healthy controls and the XRCC4 Ile401Thr allele was associated with increased DNA damage in both patients and controls. Further, the XRCC1 Arg399Gln allele was associated with the presence of antinuclear antibody and anticentromere antibody. No association was observed between these DNA repair gene polymorphic sites and clinical features of patients with SSc. CONCLUSION: These results corroborate the presence of genomic instability in SSc peripheral blood cells, as evaluated by increased DNA damage, and show that polymorphic sites of the XRCC1 and XRCC4 DNA repair genes may differentially influence DNA damage and the development of autoantibodies.
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) | 0.003 | 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".