Gene-level germline contributions to clinical risk of recurrence scores in Black and White breast cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Continuous risk of recurrence scores (CRS) based on tumor gene expression are vital prognostic tools for breast cancer (BC). Studies have shown that Black women (BW) have higher CRS than White women (WW). Although systemic injustices contribute substantially to BC disparities, evidence for biological and germline contributions is emerging. We investigated germline genetic associations with CRS and CRS disparity using approaches modeled after transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS). In the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, using race-specific predictive models of tumor expression from germline genetics, we performed race-stratified (N=1,043 WW, 1083 BW) linear regressions of three CRS (ROR-S: PAM50 subtype score; Proliferation Score; ROR-P: ROR-S plus Proliferation Score) on imputed Genetically-Regulated tumor eXpression (GReX). Using Bayesian multivariate regression and adaptive shrinkage, we tested GReX-prioritized genes for associations with PAM50 tumor expression and subtype to elucidate patterns of germline regulation underlying GReX-CRS associations. At FDR-adjusted P < 0.10, we detected 7 and 1 GReX-prioritized genes among WW and BW. Among WW, CRS were positively associated with MCM10, FAM64A, CCNB2 , and MMP1 GReX and negatively associated with VAV3, PCSK6 , and GNG11 GReX. Among BW, higher MMP1 GReX predicted lower Proliferation score and ROR-P. GReX-prioritized gene and PAM50 tumor expression associations highlighted potential mechanisms for GReX-prioritized gene to CRS associations. Among BC patients, we find differential germline associations with CRS by race, underscoring the need for larger, diverse datasets in molecular studies of BC. Our findings also suggest possible germline trans -regulation of PAM50 tumor expression, with potential implications for CRS interpretation in clinical settings. SIGNIFICANCE We find race-specific genetic associations with breast cancer risk-of-recurrence scores (CRS). Follow-up analyses suggest mediation of these associations by PAM50 molecular subtype and gene expression, with implications for clinical interpretation of CRS.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".