NTHL1 is a recessive cancer susceptibility gene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In search of novel breast cancer (BC) risk variants, we performed a whole-exome sequencing and variant analysis of 69 Finnish BC patients as well as analysed loss-of-function variants identified in DNA repair genes in the Finns from the Genome Aggregation Database. Additionally, we carried out a validation study of SERPINA3 c.918-1G>C, recently suggested for BC predisposition. We estimated the frequencies of 41 rare candidate variants in 38 genes by genotyping them in 2482–4101 BC patients and in 1273–3985 controls. We further evaluated all coding variants in the candidate genes in a dataset of 18,786 BC patients and 182,927 controls from FinnGen. None of the variants associated significantly with cancer risk in the primary BC series; however, in the FinnGen data, NTHL1 c.244C>T p.(Gln82Ter) associated with BC with a high risk for homozygous (OR = 44.7 [95% CI 6.90–290], P = 6.7 × 10–5) and a low risk for heterozygous women (OR = 1.39 [1.18–1.64], P = 7.8 × 10–5). Furthermore, the results suggested a high risk of colorectal, urinary tract, and basal-cell skin cancer for homozygous individuals, supporting NTHL1 as a recessive multi-tumour susceptibility gene. No significant association with BC risk was detected for SERPINA3 or any other evaluated gene.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".