Abstract 2214: Genome-wide gene-diabetes and gene-obesity interaction scan in the pancreatic cancer case control consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal malignancy due to late diagnosis and aggressiveness of the tumor. Characterization of high-risk populations for monitoring, intervention and early detection remains challenging. Obesity and diabetes are potentially modifiable contributors to pancreatic cancer. Genetic factors modifying the risk of obesity- and diabetes-induced pancreatic cancer have previously not been fully investigated at the genome-wide level. Hypothesis There are potential genetic factors modifying the associations between obesity/diabetes and pancreatic cancer. Methods Integrating genotype with risk factor data from a GWAS for the Pancreatic Cancer Case Control Consortium, we performed a genome-wide gene-environment interaction (G x E) scan for 457,688 SNPs in a discovery study of 2,028 cases and 2,109 controls using state-of-the-art methods including case-only (CO), case-control (CC), Empirical Hierarchical Bayes (EHB), Empirical-Bayes test (EB) and three 2-step approaches (DG2, EG2, DGEG2). Results We detected a genome-wide significant (P < 1.09 x 10-7 ) interaction of diabetes with rs13061928 (in CNTN4) in CO (P = 8.8 x 10-8 ), which was independent of diabetes in control group (P = 0.08). The minor allele was in a synergism with diabetes on the cancer risk: diabetics carrying GA/AA genotype had a 3.39-fold (95% CI: 2.47-4.65) increased disease risk compared with non-diabetics carrying GG genotype. Consistently, the SNP-diabetes interaction had a high ranking statistic in EHB (No.1) and high p-value ranks for EG2 and DGEG2 methods (No.1, P= 5.44 x 10-5). Conclusions These observations, once validated/confirmed, may help define at-risk subpopulation and initiate targeted intervention and prevention of pancreatic cancer. Genome-wide G x E analysis requires larger sample size than genetic main effects scan; combining the CO method with alternative methods may be the optimal scheme for genome-wide G x E analysis. Citation Format: Hongwei Tang, Eric J. Duell, Harvey A. Risch Risch, Sara H. Olson, H. Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Steven Gallinger, Elizabeth A. Holly, Gloria M. Petersen, Paige M. Bracci, Robert R. McWilliams, Mazda Jenab, Elio Riboli, Anne Tjønneland, Marie Christine Boutron-Ruault, Rudolf Kaaks, Dimitrios Trichopoulos, Salvatore Panico, Malin Sund, Petra H. M Peeters, Kay-Tee Khaw, Christopher I Amos, Donghui Li, Peng Wei. Genome-wide gene-diabetes and gene-obesity interaction scan in the pancreatic cancer case control consortium. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 2214. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-2214
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 | 0.011 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".