MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738417397 · doi:10.1002/mgg3.317

Targeted sequencing of 36 known or putative colorectal cancer susceptibility genes

2017· article· en· W2738417397 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa S. DeRycke, Shanaka R. Gunawardena, Jessica R. Balcom, Angela M. Pickart, Lindsey Waltman, Amy J. French, Shannon K. McDonnell, Shaun M. Riska, Zachary C. Fogarty, Melissa C. Larson, Sumit Middha, Bruce W. Eckloff, Yan W. Asmann, Matthew J. Ferber, Robert W. Haile, Steven Gallinger, Mark Clendenning, Christophe Rosty, Aung Ko Win, Daniel D. Buchanan, John L. Hopper, Polly A. Newcomb, Loı̈c Le Marchand, Ellen L. Goode, Noralane M. Lindor, Stephen N. Thibodeau

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCalifornia Department of Public HealthMayo Clinic
KeywordsMSH2MSH6MUTYHMLH1GeneticsLynch syndromeMissense mutationPMS2BiologyColorectal cancerNonsense mutationGeneGermline mutationDNA mismatch repairCancerMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mutations in several genes predispose to colorectal cancer. Genetic testing for hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes was previously limited to single gene tests; thus, only a very limited number of genes were tested, and rarely those infrequently mutated in colorectal cancer. Next-generation sequencing technologies have made it possible to sequencing panels of genes known and suspected to influence colorectal cancer susceptibility. METHODS: = 129). Ninety-three unaffected controls were also sequenced. RESULTS: mutations (7.5%). Four cases with intact MMR protein expression by immunohistochemistry carried pathogenic MMR mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Results across case subsets may help prioritize genes for inclusion in clinical gene panel tests and underscore the issue of variants of uncertain significance both in well-characterized genes and those for which limited experience has accumulated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Genetics & Genomic MedicineSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207