MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P6-08-31: BRCA1 interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1 (BRIP1) as a cancer susceptibility gene

2020· article· en· W3013615718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mukul Singal, Manasi Godbole, Kim Povenzano, Beth Elmore, Mehul Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerBreast cancerMedicineOvarian cancerMutationOncologyGeneticsInternal medicineGenetic testingGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer as well as the most common cause of cancer associated deaths in women worldwide. National Comprehensive Cancer Network has detailed criteria for identifying patients at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes. Many multigene genetic testing panels are in use for screening and prognostication purposes. While pathogenic mutation in BRCA 1 and 2 mutations have been established as risk factors for developing breast cancer, the association of other germ line mutations with breast cancer is less defined. BRCA1 interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1 (BRIP1) influences the DNA repair ability as well as tumor suppressor function of BRCA1 and is associated with increased risk of ovarian cancer. Studies looking at association of BRIP1 mutation with risk of breast cancer have provided conflicting data and currently, BRIP1 is not implicated in causing breast cancer. Methods: We conducted chart review of patients who were referred for genetic testing at the Lipson Cancer Institute/Rochester General Hospital, Rochester, NY and tested positive for BRIP1 mutation alone. Samples were sent to Myriad Genetics for Integrated BRACAnalysis® testing with myRisk® panel looking at 35 genes for mutation. BRIP1 mutations with abnormal protein production and/or function thought to increase risk for ovarian cancer (pathogenic or likely pathogenic) are reported as clinically significant. BRIP1 mutations with currently insufficient data to determine an increased risk are reported as variations of uncertain significance. The panel does not report benign and likely benign mutations. Results: We found nine patients who tested positive for BRIP1 mutation and were negative for other genomic alteration including BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation (Table 1 and 2). Four patients carried the known high risk BRIP1 mutation and five carried BRIP1 mutations of undetermined significance. One of four patients with known high risk BRIP1 mutations had a personal history but no family history of breast cancer while the remaining three had a family history but no personal history of breast cancer. All five patients with BRIP1 mutations of uncertain significance had both personal and family history of breast cancer. Conclusion: The known high risk BRIP1 mutations are probably not associated with increased risk of breast cancer. However, at least some of the BRIP1 mutations of uncertain significance are likely very significant and associated with increased risk of breast cancer. This association needs to be confirmed in a larger patient population. Table 1: Carriers of BRIP1 variations of uncertain significanceSerial NumberAge at time of screeningPositive BRIP 1 mutation Personal history of breast cancerFamily history of breast cancerAncestry164BRIP1 mutation, c.817A>GYesYesGerman/ Irish278BRIP1 mutation, c. 2220G>TYesYesHolland344BRIP1 mutation, c3237T>GYesYesAfrican430BRIP1 mutation, c.380-17T>AYesYesIrish/ English/ German555BRIP1 mutation, c.139C>GYesYesScottish Table 2: Carriers of high risk BRIP1 mutationsSerial NumberAge at time of screeningPositive BRIP 1 mutation Personal history of breast cancerFamily history of breast cancerAncestry169BRIP1 mutation, c.2255_2256delYesNoItalian/ Hungarian263BRIP1 mutation, c548delNoYesFrench Canadian337BRIP1 mutation, c.1045G>CNoYesDutch460BRIP1 mutation, c.2099T>ANoYesUnknown Citation Format: Mukul Singal, Manasi M Godbole, Kim Povenzano, Beth Elmore, Mehul P Patel. BRCA1 interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1 (BRIP1) as a cancer susceptibility gene [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-08-31.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→