MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059456825 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2013-4831

Abstract 4831: Additive and multiplicative gene-environment interactions for colorectal cancer risk.

2013· article· en· W2059456825 on OpenAlexaff
Mengmeng Du, Sonja I. Berndt, Hermann Brenner, Bette J. Caan, Peter T. Campbell, Graham Casey, Andrew T. Chan, Jenny Chang‐Claude, Stephen J. Chanock, Nilanjan Chatterjee, David V. Conti, David Duggan, Jane C. Figueiredo, Steven Gallinger, Jian Gong, Robert W. Haile, Tabitha A. Harrison, Richard B. Hayes, Michael Hoffmeister, John L. Hopper, Li Hsu, Thomas J. Hudson, Carolyn M. Hutter, Eric J. Jacobs, Mark A. Jenkins, Shuo Jiao, Laurence N. Kolonel, Peter Kraft, Loı̈c Le Marchand, Mathieu Lemire, Yi Lin, Noralane M. Lindor, Polly A. Newcomb, John D. Potter, Robert E. Schoen, Fredrick R. Schumacher, Daniela Seminara, Martha L. Slattery, Stephen N. Thibodeau, Cornelia M. Ulrich, Aung Ko Win, Emily White, Brent W. Zanke, Ulrike Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColorectal cancerGenetic associationGenome-wide association studyGenetic predispositionBayes' theoremLogistic regressionGeneticsGene–environment interactionCancerBiologyMedicineOncologyInternal medicineGenotypeStatisticsGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Genetic and environmental factors influence colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. Previous studies have provided additional etiologic insight by examining multiplicative gene-environment interactions for individual susceptibility loci. However, individual loci confer only modest risks, which may limit statistical power and clinical significance. A genetic risk score comprising known CRC loci may provide a more comprehensive assessment of risk. Further, there is a paucity of data on the role of additive gene-environment interactions, which may have greater public health implications than multiplicative interactions. We thus evaluated both additive and multiplicative interactions between a genetic risk score and 15 key environmental factors on risk of CRC. Methods: We conducted an analysis of 10,491 CRC cases and 10,725 controls of European ancestry in 7 cohort and 6 case-control studies participating in the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO) or Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR). To provide a global measure of genetic predisposition, information across multiple risk variants was combined by calculating a genetic risk score based on 24 polymorphisms near 21 genetic loci identified in previous genome-wide association studies. For the genetic score and environmental factors, the reference category corresponded to that associated with lower CRC risk. We tested for additive interactions by estimating relative excess risk due to interactions (RERIs) using logistic regression; for multiplicative interactions we used an empirical-Bayes approach. Nominal P values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: After adjustment for age, sex, center, study, principal components, and total energy, as appropriate, we observed super-additive gene-environment interactions for CRC risk between the genetic risk score and body mass index (RERI=0.15; 95% CI: 0.00-0.31), ever smoking (RERI=0.14; 95% CI: 0.00-0.28), pack-years of smoking (RERI=0.23; 95% CI: 0.05-0.41), postmenopausal hormone therapy use (RERI=0.38; 95% CI: 0.17-0.59), and intake of processed meat (RERI=0.23; 95% CI: 0.06-0.40). Of the 15 environmental risk factors, 12 showed RERIs > 0 – suggesting an overall trend toward super-additive interactions for these factors. In addition, we observed evidence of sub-multiplicative interactions for use of aspirin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. There were no other statistically significant multiplicative interactions. Conclusions: We observed evidence for super-additive effects of genetic predisposition and environmental risk factors on risk of CRC. Our findings suggest that certain environmental risk factors have stronger effects on absolute risk among individuals with higher genetic risk of CRC. If confirmed in future studies, these results may have implications for targeted prevention strategies. Citation Format: Mengmeng Du, Sonja I. Berndt, Hermann Brenner, Bette J. Caan, Peter T. Campbell, Graham Casey, Andrew Chan, Jenny Chang-Claude, Stephen J. Chanock, Nilanjan Chatterjee, David V. Conti, David Duggan, Jane C. Figueiredo, Steven Gallinger, Jian Gong, Robert W. Haile, Tabitha A. Harrison, Richard B. Hayes, Michael Hoffmeister, John L. Hopper, Li Hsu, Thomas J. Hudson, Carolyn M. Hutter, Eric J. Jacobs, Mark A. Jenkins, Shuo Jiao, Laurence N. Kolonel, Peter Kraft, Loic Le Marchand, Mathieu Lemire, Yi Lin, Noralane M. Lindor, Polly A. Newcomb, John D. Potter, Robert E. Schoen, Fredrick R. Schumacher, Daniela Seminara, Martha L. Slattery, Stephen N. Thibodeau, Cornelia M. Ulrich, Aung Ko Win, Emily White, Brent W. Zanke, Ulrike Peters. Additive and multiplicative gene-environment interactions for colorectal cancer risk. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 4831. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-4831

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)0.005
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207