MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2329291046 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-1869

Abstract 1869: Genetic variants of DNA repair genes and lung cancer among nonsmokers: A pooled analysis in the International Lung Cancer Consortium

2010· article· en· W2329291046 on OpenAlexaff
Yuan‐Chin Amy Lee, Paolo Boffetta, Paul Brennan, David C. Christiani, Chikako Kiyohara, Qing Lan, Adeline Seow, Paolo Vineis, Zuo‐Feng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerMedicineSingle-nucleotide polymorphismOdds ratioGenotypingInternal medicineCancerOncologyLogistic regressionConfidence intervalEpidemiologyGenotypeGeneticsGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Lung cancer among nonsmokers has been considered as a different disease from that among smokers. Involuntary smoking has been suggested to be a risk factor for lung cancer among nonsmokers with a modest effect. Few studies have examined the role of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the DNA repair genes and their potential interactions with involuntary smoking on the development of lung cancer among nonsmokers. Methods We evaluated the associations between SNPs of the DNA repair genes and lung cancer based on a pooled data of the International Lung Cancer Consortium. The individual-level epidemiological data and genotyping data on eight SNPs from six participating studies were pooled, including 845 nonsmoker cases and 4,262 nonsmoker controls. Logistic regression models with adjustment by age, sex, ethnicity, study, and ever involuntary smoking status were used to obtain odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Among nonsmokers, the associations with the polymorphisms in OGG1 S326C and XPD D312N were observed among those with involuntary smoking (for OGG1 S326C: OR=1.61, 95% CI 1.18-2.20 for CG, OR=1.74, 0.99-3.06 for GG, compared to CC; for XPD D312N: OR=1.06, 0.76-1.47 for AG, OR=1.60, 1.06-2.42 for AA, compared to GG), but not for those without involuntary smoking (for OGG1 S326C: OR=0.78, 0.39-1.54 for CG, OR=0.88, 0.25-3.06 for GG, compared to CC; for XPD D312N: OR=1.13, 0.57-2.21 for AG, OR=0.81, 0.27-2.43 for AA, compared to GG). The association with XRCC3 T241M variant was detected for adenocarcinoma and non-small cell lung cancer among those without exposure to involuntary smoking (adenocarcinoma: OR=3.52, 1.21-10.20 for AA, OR=0.94, 0.38-2.38 for GA, compared to GG; and non-small cell lung cancer: OR=2.75, 1.05-7.21 for AA, OR=1.10, 0.51-2.38 for GA, compared to GG, respectively). Due to limited power, no apparent interaction between DNA repair SNPs and involuntary smoking was detected. Conclusion This is the first large-scale collaborative study on the relationship between DNA repair genetic variants and lung cancer among nonsmokers, accounting for involuntary smoking. Our results show that SNPs of the DNA repair genes may play an important role for lung cancer among nonsmokers, and the associations may vary by involuntary smoking status and histological subtype. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 1869.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.014
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicRNA modifications and cancer→French-language works237,207→