MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926872645 · doi:10.1002/jcb.28633

Association between the flap endonuclease 1 gene polymorphisms and cancer susceptibility: An updated meta‐analysis

2019· review· en· W2926872645 on OpenAlexaff
Abdolkarim Moazeni‐Roodi, Saeid Ghavami, Hossein Ansari, Mohammad Hashemi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Biochemistry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Institute in Oncology and HematologyCancerCare Manitoba
FundersZahedan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMeta-analysisCancerColorectal cancerLung cancerBreast cancerOncologyCarcinogenesisInternal medicineEsophageal cancerMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flap endonuclease 1 (FEN1) has emerged as an important enzyme in the maintenance of genomic instability and preventing carcinogenesis. The relationship between FEN1 -69G>A (rs174538)+4150G>T (rs4246215) polymorphisms and cancer susceptibility has been reported; however, results were inconclusive. In the present study, a meta-analysis of data from eligible reports was carried out to summarize the possible relationship between FEN1 polymorphisms and cancer risk. A total of 11 articles, including 20 studies with 7366 cases and 9028 controls and 18 studies with 6649 cases and 8325 controls for FEN1 rs174538 and FEN1 rs4246215 polymorphisms, respectively, were recruited for meta-analysis. Overall, meta-analyses showed that FEN1 rs174538 and rs4246215 polymorphisms are significantly associated with the decreased risk of cancer. The stratified analysis proposed that both variants were associated with protection against gastrointestinal cancer, breast cancer, hepatocellular cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, and lung cancer. In conclusion, this meta-analysis revealed an association between FEN1 polymorphisms and cancer risk. Additional studies in a larger study population that include subjects from a variety of ethnicities are warranted to further verify our findings.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular BiochemistrySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207