Genome-wide association study identifies tumor anatomical site-specific risk variants for colorectal cancer survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Identification of new genetic markers may improve the prediction of colorectal cancer prognosis. Our objective was to examine genome-wide associations of germline genetic variants with disease-specific survival in an analysis of 16,964 cases of colorectal cancer. We analyzed genotype and colorectal cancer-specific survival data from a consortium of 15 studies. Approximately 7.5 million SNPs were examined under the log-additive model using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for clinical factors and principal components. Additionally, we ran secondary analyses stratifying by tumor site and disease stage. We used a genome-wide p-value threshold of 5 × 10–8 to assess statistical significance. No variants were statistically significantly associated with disease-specific survival in the full case analysis or in the stage-stratified analyses. Three SNPs were statistically significantly associated with disease-specific survival for cases with tumors located in the distal colon (rs698022, HR = 1.48, CI 1.30–1.69, p = 8.47 × 10–9) and the proximal colon (rs189655236, HR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.65–2.77, p = 9.19 × 10–9 and rs144717887, HR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.57–2.58, p = 3.14 × 10–8), whereas no associations were detected for rectal tumors. Findings from this large genome-wide association study highlight the potential for anatomical-site-stratified genome-wide studies to identify germline genetic risk variants associated with colorectal cancer-specific survival. Larger sample sizes and further replication efforts are needed to more fully interpret these findings.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".