Germline genomic patterns are associated with cancer risk, oncogenic pathways, and clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an ongoing debate on the importance of genetic factors in cancer development, where gene-centered cancer predisposition seems to show that only 5 to 10% of the cancer cases are inheritable. By conducting a systematic analysis of germline genomes of 9712 cancer patients representing 22 common cancer types along with 16,670 noncancer individuals, we identified seven cancer-associated germline genomic patterns (CGGPs), which summarized trinucleotide mutational spectra of germline genomes. A few CGGPs were consistently enriched in the germline genomes of patients whose tumors had smoking signatures or correlated with oncogenesis- and genome instability-related mutations. Furthermore, subgroups defined by the CGGPs were significantly associated with distinct oncogenic pathways, tumor histological subtypes, and prognosis in 13 common cancer types, suggesting that germline genomic patterns enable to inform treatment and clinical outcomes. These results provided evidence that cancer risk and clinical outcomes could be encoded in germline genomes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".