Associations Between XPD Lys751Gln Polymorphism and Leukemia: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the present study was to clarify the potential relationship of xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) Lys751Gln polymorphisms and leukemia risk. Methods: Comprehensive electronic search in Pubmed, Web of Science, EBSCO, the Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to find original articles about the association between XPD Lys751Gln polymorphisms and leukemia risk published before Mar 2017. Literature quality assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed using I2 statistics. Random- or fixed-effects models was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) in the presence or absence of heterogeneity, respectively. Sensitivity analyses to assess the influence of individual studies on the pooled estimate. Publication bias was investigated using funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Analyses were performed by using Stata 14.0 and Revman 5.3. Results: Fourteen studies with a total of 7525 participants (2,757 patients and 4,768 controls) were included in this meta-analysis. We found that XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism significantly increased the risk of developing leukemia in both a dominant [Odds Ratio (OR)] = 1.21, 95%CI [1.10-1.35], P < 0.001) and heterozygote (OR = 1.22, 95%CI [1.09-1.36], P < 0.001) models. An allele model showed borderline significant increase in leukemia risk (OR = 1.13, 95%CI [1.00-1.27], P = 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed a consistent association for some genetic models in Caucasian populations, adult or chronic groups, and in almost all models of childhood or acute groups. Conclusions: Our results overall indicate that XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism increases the risk of leukemia, especially in childhood and acute cases.
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 | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".