A comprehensive gene–environment interaction analysis in Ovarian Cancer using genome‐wide significant common variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a follow‐up to genome‐wide association analysis of common variants associated with ovarian carcinoma (cancer), our study considers seven well‐known ovarian cancer risk factors and their interactions with 28 genome‐wide significant common genetic variants. The interaction analyses were based on data from 9971 ovarian cancer cases and 15,566 controls from 17 case–control studies. Likelihood ratio and Wald tests for multiplicative interaction and for relative excess risk due to additive interaction were used. The top multiplicative interaction was noted between oral contraceptive pill (OCP) use (ever vs. never) and rs13255292 (p value = 3.48 × 10−4). Among women with the TT genotype for this variant, the odds ratio for OCP use was 0.53 (95% CI = 0.46–0.60) compared to 0.71 (95%CI = 0.66–0.77) for women with the CC genotype. When stratified by duration of OCP use, women with 1–5 years of OCP use exhibited differential protective benefit across genotypes. However, no interaction on either the multiplicative or additive scale was found to be statistically significant after multiple testing correction. The results suggest that OCP use may offer increased benefit for women who are carriers of the T allele in rs13255292. On the other hand, for women carrying the C allele in this variant, longer (5+ years) use of OCP may reduce the impact of carrying the risk allele of this SNP. Replication of this finding is needed. The study presents a comprehensive analytic framework for conducting gene–environment analysis in ovarian 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".