MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014640437 · doi:10.21873/anticanres.14134

Association Between BMI and DNA Methylation in Blood or Normal Adult Breast Tissue: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3014640437 on OpenAlexafffund
Dzevka Dragic, Kaoutar Ennour‐Idrissi, Sue-Ling Chang, Francine Durocher, Caroline Diorio

Bibliographic record

VenueAnticancer Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Saint-SacrementUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation du cancer du sein du Québec
KeywordsDNA methylationBreast cancerdNaMMethylationCpG siteOncologyBody mass indexMedicineInternal medicineCancerPhysiologyBiologyBioinformaticsPathologyDNAGeneGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: Several studies have investigated the influence of obesity on DNA methylation (DNAm) to find biomarkers associated with the detection of chronic diseases, including breast cancer. The aim of the study was to systematically review studies examining the association of body mass index (BMI) and DNAm in blood or normal breast tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three scientific literature databases (PubMed, Embase and Web of Science) were screened until May 2018. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included along with ours in which we investigated this relation in the normal breast tissue of 40 breast cancer patients. CONCLUSION: BMI-associated CpG sites were highly variable with few identified in less than half of the studies. Nevertheless, a few genes potentially associated with BMI were highlighted in blood (CPT1A, ABCG1, SREBF1 and LGALS3BP) and in normal breast tissue (PTPRN2 and ABLIM2). The variability of the results could be explained by the tissue and cell-specificity of methylation and differences in methodology.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnticancer ResearchSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207