Pleiotropic Analysis of Lung Cancer and Blood Triglycerides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiologically related traits may share genetic risk factors, and pleiotropic analysis could identify individual loci associated with these traits. Because of their shared epidemiological associations, we conducted pleiotropic analysis of genome-wide association studies of lung cancer (12 160 lung cancer case patients and 16 838 control subjects) and cardiovascular disease risk factors (blood lipids from 188 577 subjects, type 2 diabetes from 148 821 subjects, body mass index from 123 865 subjects, and smoking phenotypes from 74 053 subjects). We found that 6p22.1 (rs6904596, ZNF184) was associated with both lung cancer (P = 5.50x10(-6)) and blood triglycerides (P = 1.39x10(-5)). We replicated the association in 6097 lung cancer case patients and 204 657 control subjects (P = 2.40 × 10(-4)) and in 71 113 subjects with triglycerides data (P = .01). rs6904596 reached genome-wide significance in lung cancer meta-analysis (odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval = 1.10 to 1.21 ,: Pcombined = 5.20x10(-9)). The large sample size provided by the lipid GWAS data and the shared genetic risk factors between the two traits contributed to the uncovering of a hitherto unidentified genetic locus for lung cancer.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".