Lupus-related single nucleotide polymorphisms and risk of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Determinants of the increased risk of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in SLE are unclear. Using data from a recent lymphoma genome-wide association study (GWAS), we assessed whether certain lupus-related single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were also associated with DLBCL. METHODS: GWAS data on European Caucasians from the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph) provided a total of 3857 DLBCL cases and 7666 general-population controls. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Among the 28 SLE-related SNPs investigated, the two most convincingly associated with risk of DLBCL included the CD40 SLE risk allele rs4810485 on chromosome 20q13 (OR per risk allele=1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.16, p=0.0134), and the HLA SLE risk allele rs1270942 on chromosome 6p21.33 (OR per risk allele=1.17, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.36, p=0.0362). Of additional possible interest were rs2205960 and rs12537284. The rs2205960 SNP, related to a cytokine of the tumour necrosis factor superfamily TNFSF4, was associated with an OR per risk allele of 1.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.16, p=0.0549. The OR for the rs12537284 (chromosome 7q32, IRF5 gene) risk allele was 1.08, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.18, p=0.0765. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest several plausible genetic links between DLBCL and SLE.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".