Association between a 15q25 gene variant, smoking quantity and tobacco-related cancers among 17 000 individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic variants in 15q25 have been identified as potential risk markers for lung cancer (LC), but controversy exists as to whether this is a direct association, or whether the 15q variant is simply a proxy for increased exposure to tobacco carcinogens. METHODS: We performed a detailed analysis of one 15q single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) (rs16969968) with smoking behaviour and cancer risk in a total of 17 300 subjects from five LC studies and four upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancer studies. RESULTS: Subjects with one minor allele smoked on average 0.3 cigarettes per day (CPD) more, whereas subjects with the homozygous minor AA genotype smoked on average 1.2 CPD more than subjects with a GG genotype (P < 0.001). The variant was associated with heavy smoking (>20 CPD) [odds ratio (OR) = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.34, P = 0.13 for heterozygotes and 1.81, 95% CI 1.39-2.35 for homozygotes, P < 0.0001]. The strong association between the variant and LC risk (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.23-1.38, P = 1 x 10(-18)), was virtually unchanged after adjusting for this smoking association (smoking adjusted OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.19-1.35, P = 5 x 10(-13)). Furthermore, we found an association between the variant allele and an earlier age of LC onset (P = 0.02). The association was also noted in UADT cancers (OR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15, P = 0.02). Genome wide association (GWA) analysis of over 300 000 SNPs on 11 219 subjects did not identify any additional variants related to smoking behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the strong association between 15q gene variants and LC and shows an independent association with smoking quantity, as well as an association with UADT cancers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".