In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate title for this article. Preferred titles are under thirty words.

Q: This paper describes the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) for estimating and projecting HIV prevalence levels in countries with generalised epidemics. The paper gives an overall summary of the software and interface. It describes the process of defining and modelling a national epidemic in terms of locally relevant sub-epidemics and the four epidemiological parameters used to fit a curve to produce the prevalence trends in the epidemic. It also provides an example of using the EPP in a country with a generalised epidemic. The paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the software and its envisaged future developments.

A: The UNAIDS Estimation and Projection Package: a software package to estimate and project national HIV epidemics.
****
Q: Comparative protein structure modeling predicts the three-dimensional structure of a given protein sequence (target) based primarily on its alignment to one or more proteins of known structure (templates). The prediction process consists of fold assignment, target-template alignment, model building, and model evaluation. This unit describes how to calculate comparative models using the program MODELLER and how to use the ModBase database of such models, and discusses all four steps of comparative modeling, frequently observed errors, and some applications. Modeling lactate dehydrogenase from Trichomonas vaginalis (TvLDH) is described as an example. The download and installation of the MODELLER software is also described. ©️ 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

A: Comparative Protein Structure Modeling Using MODELLER.
****
Q: BACKGROUND The association between the deficiency in mismatch repair (MMR) genes and prognosis in women with endometrial cancer is unclear. Here we report a systematic review and meta-analysis exploring this association.
METHODS We searched literature databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane) from 1980 until December 2011 to identify studies evaluating the association between MMR status and clinical outcome in endometrial cancer. The main outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
RESULTS Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. The median sample size of studies was 112, 74% were retrospective case-series and 70% performed microsatellite instability (MSI) analysis to evaluate the status of MMR. Only 22% of studies used the panel of five microsatellite markers recommended by the National Cancer Institute. Seven studies used immunohistochemistry to define MMR deficiency, but only two of them determined the expression of all four MMR proteins. Overall, significant associations between MMR and outcome were observed in 32% of studies. There was marked inter-study heterogeneity for estimates of OS and DFS. Pooled analysis did not show any significant association between deficiency in MMR and worse OS (6 studies, hazard ratio [HR] 2.0, p=0.11) or DFS (4 studies, HR ratio 1.31, p=0.66).
CONCLUSION There is no definitive evidence of a significant association between MMR status and detrimental survival in endometrial cancer.

A:
Mismatch repair status and clinical outcome in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
****