Inherited Chromosomally Integrated Human Herpesvirus 6 and Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Inherited chromosomally integrated human herpesvirus 6 (iciHHV-6) is a condition observed in approximately 1% of the population. Whether such a genetic alteration predisposes to cancer development in currently unknown. Two studies were conducted to determine whether iciHHV-6 is associated with cancer development. Methods: First, a screen of 19,597 people from the province of Quebec (Canada) was conducted. A replication test, using data from a population-based case–control study of 1,090 women with incident breast cancer and 1,053 controls from British Columbia and Ontario (Canada) was conducted. DNA samples were analyzed by qPCR and droplet digital PCR to identify iciHHV-6+ carriers. Results: In the initial study, a potential association between iciHHV-6 positivity and breast cancer was identified [OR = 2.66; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95–7.44]. In the replication dataset, no association was found between iciHHV-6 positivity in women and breast cancer (OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.35–2.15). Conclusions: We found no statistically significant associations between inherited chromosomally integrated HHV-6 and breast cancer in women. Impact: These results do not provide evidence to suggest that iciHHV-6 is a risk factor for breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(3); 425–7. ©2016 AACR.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".