Multiple Gene-Environment Interactions on the Angiogenesis Gene-Pathway Impact Rectal Cancer Risk and Survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterization of gene-environment interactions (GEIs) in cancer is limited. We aimed at identifying GEIs in rectal cancer focusing on a relevant biologic process involving the angiogenesis pathway and relevant environmental exposures: cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and animal protein intake. We analyzed data from 747 rectal cancer cases and 956 controls from the Diet, Activity and Lifestyle as a Risk Factor for Rectal Cancer study. We applied a 3-step analysis approach: first, we searched for interactions among single nucleotide polymorphisms on the pathway genes; second, we searched for interactions among the genes, both steps using Logic regression; third, we examined the GEIs significant at the 5% level using logistic regression for cancer risk and Cox proportional hazards models for survival. Permutation-based test was used for multiple testing adjustment. We identified 8 significant GEIs associated with risk among 6 genes adjusting for multiple testing: TNF (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.10, 3.11), TLR4 (OR = 2.34, 95% CI: 1.38, 3.98), and EGR2 (OR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.04, 4.78) with smoking; IGF1R (OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.72), TLR4 (OR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.22, 3.60) and EGR2 (OR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.01, 4.46) with alcohol; and PDGFB (OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.92) and MMP1 (OR = 2.44, 95% CI: 1.24, 4.81) with protein. Five GEIs were associated with survival at the 5% significance level but not after multiple testing adjustment: CXCR1 (HR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.13, 3.75) with smoking; and KDR (HR = 4.36, 95% CI: 1.62, 11.73), TLR2 (HR = 9.06, 95% CI: 1.14, 72.11), EGR2 (HR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.42, 4.22), and EGFR (HR = 6.33, 95% CI: 1.95, 20.54) with protein. GEIs between angiogenesis genes and smoking, alcohol, and animal protein impact rectal cancer risk. Our results support the importance of considering the biologic hypothesis to characterize GEIs associated with cancer outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".