MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A decade of RAD51C/D: Germline pathogenic variants and their phenotypic landscape

2021· preprint· en· W4240558261 on OpenAlexaff
Jacopo Boni, Aida Idani, Carla Roca, Lídia Feliubadaló, Eva Tomiak, Evan Weber, William D. Foulkes, Alexandre Orthwein, Zaki El Haffaf, Conxi Lázaro, Bárbara Rivera

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPALB2GermlineMLH1BiologyCHEK2GeneticsGeneMUTYHGermline mutationCancerProstate cancerPhenotypeHomologous recombinationCancer researchDNA repairMutationDNA mismatch repair

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Defects in DNA repair genes have been extensively associated to cancer susceptibility. Germline pathogenic variants (GPV) in genes involved in homologous recombination repair pathway predispose to cancers arising mainly in breast and ovary, but also other tissues. The RAD51 paralogs RAD51C and RAD51D were included in this group 10 years ago, when germline variants were associated to non-BRCA1/2 familial ovarian cancer. However, whether GPVs in these genes are associated with other cancers remains unknown. Here, we have reviewed the landscape of RAD51C and RAD51D germline variants in cancer reported in the literature during the last decade, curating a total of 341 variants and the phenotypes found in families with RAD51C/D variant carriers. A comprehensive catalogue has been generated pinpointing to the existence of recurrent variants in both genes. Investigation of pedigrees found fourteen other cancer types reported more than five times in families with carriers of RAD51C/D pathogenic variants. Among those, colorectal (3.72% and 4.43%) (RAD51C/D respectively), pancreatic (1.19% and 0.86%), lung (1.27% and 2.58%), prostate (1.56% and 1.48%), and leukemia (1.56% and 1.11%) cancer were the most prevalent types. This work highlights how both genes might confer susceptibility to a broader spectrum of cancer types than ovary and breast.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDNA Repair Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→