MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734734668 · doi:10.1002/ijc.30883

Inherited variation in circadian rhythm genes and risks of prostate cancer and three other cancer sites in combined cancer consortia

2017· article· en· W2734734668 on OpenAlexafffund
Fangyi Gu, Han Zhang, Paula L. Hyland, Sonja I. Berndt, Susan M. Gapstur, William Wheeler, Christopher I. Amos, Stéphane Bezieau, Heike Bickeböller, Hermann Brenner, Paul Brennan, Jenny Chang‐Claude, David V. Conti, Jennifer A. Doherty, Stephen B. Gruber, Tabitha A. Harrison, Richard B. Hayes, Michael Hoffmeister, Richard S. Houlston, Mark A. Jenkins, Peter Kraft, Kate Lawrenson, James McKay, Sarah C. Markt, Lorelei A. Mucci, Catherine M. Phelan, Conghui Qu, Angela Risch, Mary Anne Rossing, H.‐Erich Wichmann, Jianxin Shi, Eva Schernhammer, Kai Yu, Maria Teresa Landi, Neil E. Caporaso

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationCancer Council VictoriaMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGroupement des Entreprises Françaises dans la lutte contre le CancerVetenskapsrådetCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftWorld Health OrganizationCancer Research UKGénome QuébecBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungSwedish Cancer FoundationJohns Hopkins UniversityProstate Cancer FoundationU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustNational Cancer Research InstituteProstate Cancer Foundation of AustraliaNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research InstituteVicHealthConseil Régional des Pays de la LoireOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAssociation Anne de Bretagne GenetiqueEuropean CommissionBroad Institute
KeywordsCircadian rhythmProstate cancerCancerBiologyGeneRhythmGeneticsMedicineOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circadian disruption has been linked to carcinogenesis in animal models, but the evidence in humans is inconclusive. Genetic variation in circadian rhythm genes provides a tool to investigate such associations. We examined associations of genetic variation in nine core circadian rhythm genes and six melatonin pathway genes with risk of colorectal, lung, ovarian and prostate cancers using data from the Genetic Associations and Mechanisms in Oncology (GAME‐ON) network. The major results for prostate cancer were replicated in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial, and for colorectal cancer in the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO). The total number of cancer cases and controls was 15,838/18,159 for colorectal, 14,818/14,227 for prostate, 12,537/17,285 for lung and 4,369/9,123 for ovary. For each cancer site, we conducted gene‐based and pathway‐based analyses by applying the summary‐based Adaptive Rank Truncated Product method (sARTP) on the summary association statistics for each SNP within the candidate gene regions. Aggregate genetic variation in circadian rhythm and melatonin pathways were significantly associated with the risk of prostate cancer in data combining GAME‐ON and PLCO, after Bonferroni correction (ppathway < 0.00625). The two most significant genes were NPAS2 (pgene = 0.0062) and AANAT (pgene = 0.00078); the latter being significant after Bonferroni correction. For colorectal cancer, we observed a suggestive association with the circadian rhythm pathway in GAME‐ON (ppathway = 0.021); this association was not confirmed in GECCO (ppathway = 0.76) or the combined data (ppathway = 0.17). No significant association was observed for ovarian and lung cancer. These findings support a potential role for circadian rhythm and melatonin pathways in prostate carcinogenesis. Further functional studies are needed to better understand the underlying biologic mechanisms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207