MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401208972 · doi:10.1200/po.24.00094

Germline Susceptibility to Renal Cell Carcinoma and Implications for Genetic Screening

2024· article· en· W4401208972 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kate I. Glennon, Mikiko Endo, Yoshiaki Usui, Yusuke Iwasaki, Rodney H. Breau, Anil Kapoor, Mark Lathrop, Simon Tanguay, Yukihide Momozawa, Yasser Riazalhosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Precision Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityJuravinski Cancer CentreUniversity of OttawaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermlineRenal cell carcinomaMedicineGenetic predispositionOncologyInternal medicineCHEK2Odds ratioGenetic testingBAP1CancerKidney cancerGermline mutationClear cell renal cell carcinomaBiologyGeneticsGeneMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE Genetic susceptibility to nonsyndromic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains poorly understood, especially for different histological subtypes, as does variations in genetic predisposition in different populations. The objectives of this study were to identify risk genes for RCC in the Canadian population, investigate their clinical significance, and evaluate variations in germline pathogenic variants (PVs) among patients with RCC across the globe. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted targeted sequencing of 19 RCC-related and 27 cancer predisposition genes for 960 patients with RCC from Canada and identified genes enriched in rare germline PVs in RCC compared with cancer-free controls. We combined our results with those reported for patients from Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States to investigate PV variations in different populations. Furthermore, we evaluated the performance of referral criteria for genetic screening for including patients with rare PVs. RESULTS We identified 39 germline PVs in 56 patients (5.8%) from the Canadian cohort. Compared with cancer-free controls, PVs in CHEK2 (odds ratio [OR], 4.8 [95% CI, 2.7 to 7.9], P = 3.94 × 10−5) and ATM (OR, 4.5 [95% CI, 2.0 to 8.7], P = .016) were significantly enriched in patients with clear cell, whereas PVs in FH (OR, 215.1 [95% CI, 64.4 to 597.8], P = 6.14 × 10−9) were enriched in patients with non-clear cell RCCs. PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and ATM were associated with metastasis ( P = .003). Comparative analyses showed an enrichment of TP53 PVs in patients from Japan, of CHEK2 and ATM in patients from Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, and of FH and BAP1 in the United States. CONCLUSION CHEK2, ATM, and FH are risk genes for RCC in the Canadian population, whereas PVs in BRCA1/ 2 and ATM are associated with risk of metastasis. Globally, clinical guidelines for genetic screening in RCC fail to include more than 70% of patients with rare germline PVs.

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)0.015
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 score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Precision OncologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207