MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Functional BRM promoter polymorphisms, pancreatic adenocarcinoma risk, and survival.

2014· article· en· W2589794075 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maja Segedi, Laura N. Anderson, Osvaldo Espin‐Garcia, Ayelet Borgida, Teresa Bianco, Dangxiao Cheng, Zhuo Chen, Devalben Patel, M. Catherine Brown, Michelle Cotterchio, Steven Gallinger, Wei Xu, David Reisman, Geoffrey Liu, Sean P. Cleary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai HospitalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncologyInternal medicineHazard ratioOdds ratioPancreatic cancerProportional hazards modelLung cancerAdenocarcinomaPopulationCancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

222 Background: Variant alleles of two promoter polymorphisms in the BRM gene (BRM-741, BRM -1321), create MEF2D transcription binding sites that lead to epigenetic silencing of BRM, the key catalytic component of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex (PMID:23524580). BRM suppression can be reversed pharmacologically (PMID: 21478905). Our group and others have reported associations with lung, head and neck, and hepatocellular cancer risk (PMIDs: 21478907, 23322154, 23359823). We have also reported associations with lung and esophageal cancer prognosis (ASCO 2013; abstr 11057 and 4077). In this analysis, we assessed risk and survival associations with pancreatic cancer. Methods: A population-based case-control study was conducted in Ontario with 623 histologically-confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases and 1192 age/gender distribution-matched controls (PMID: 23908141). Survival of cases was obtained through the Ontario Cancer Registry. Logistic and Cox proportional hazard regression models were fitted, adjusting for relevant covariates. Results: Median age was 65 years; 52% were male; 53% had received a curative resection; Stage I (8%), II (55%), III (14%), IV (23%); 79% received chemotherapy; 83% had died. In the risk analysis, the adjusted odds ratios were 1.01 (95%CI:0.1-2.0) and 0.96 (95%CI:0.7-1.3) for the homozygous variants of BRM-741 and BRM-1321, respectively, when each was compared to wildtype; adjusted odds ratio of double-homozygotes was 1.11 (95%CI:0.80-1.53) when compared to the double-wildtype. In contrast for the survival analysis, the hazard ratios (adjusted for age, stage, receipt of curative surgery, receipt of chemotherapy, and packyears) were 2.19 (95%CI: 1.9-2.5) for BRM-741 and 1.94 (95%CI: 1.7-2.2) for BRM-1321, per each unit increase in variant alleles. Compared with the double-wildtype, the adjusted hazard ratio for carrying no, one, and two homozygous (double-homozygous) variants were 2.14 (95%CI:1.6-2.8), 4.17 (95%CI:3.0-5.7), and 8.03 (95%CI: 5.7-11.4), respectively. Conclusions: Two functional promoter BRM polymorphisms were not associated with pancreatic adenocarcinoma risk, but are strongly associated with survival.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207