MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317357908 · doi:10.1097/jcma.0000000000000851

Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 polymorphisms and breast cancer susceptibility: Evidence from a meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4317357908 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hao-Yun Chang, Chun‐Yu Liu, Y. M. Dennis Lo, Shih‐Hwa Chiou, Kai-Hsi Lu, Ming‐Cheng Lee, Yuan‐Hung Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Chinese Medical Association · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFar Eastern Memorial HospitalShanghai Educational Development Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineMeta-analysisOncologyOdds ratioInternal medicineSubgroup analysisAlleleImmunologyCytotoxic T cellConfidence intervalCancerGeneGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) is an immune checkpoint and regulates the immune function of T cells. However, previous findings regarding the association of CTLA-4 polymorphisms and breast cancer remain inconclusive. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to investigate the potential effects of five polymorphisms (-1722 T/C, -1661 A/G -318 C/T, +49 A/G, and CT60 A/G) in the CTLA-4 gene on breast cancer susceptibility. METHODS: Relevant literatures were systematically searched through electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to October 10, 2021. Available data were extracted and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals were used to estimate the pooling effect size. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied for assessing the quality of included studies. We conducted subgroup analyses based on ethnicity and control sources to explore levels of heterogeneity. Moreover, sensitivity analysis and publication bias were assessed. RESULTS: Finally, a total of 12 eligible studies regarding CTLA-4 polymorphisms and breast cancer were included. For overall analyses, only the +49 A/G polymorphism was significantly associated with breast cancer under allelic (OR = 1.19), dominant (OR = 1.27), and recessive (OR = 1.27) models. Ethnicity-based subgroup analysis found that the +49 A/G polymorphism has a significant risk (OR = 2.03) of breast cancer under the recessive model in the non-Asian population. Studies with hospital-based controls showed that the +49 A/G polymorphism has significant breast cancer risks under allelic (OR = 1.44), dominant (OR = 1.86), and recessive (OR = 1.60) models. In addition, those with population-based controls found that -1722 T/C polymorphism has a significant breast cancer risk under allelic (OR = 1.19) and dominant (OR = 1.26) models. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggested that CTLA-4 + 49 A/G polymorphism may significantly associate with breast cancer susceptibility. Future studies containing various populations are helpful for evaluating the impacts of CTLA-4 polymorphisms on breast cancer susceptibility.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Chinese Medical AssociationSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207