MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213184389 · doi:10.1038/s41391-022-00497-7

Prostate cancer risk stratification improvement across multiple ancestries with new polygenic hazard score

2022· article· en· W4213184389 on OpenAlexaff
Minh‐Phuong Huynh‐Le, Roshan Karunamuni, Chun Chieh Fan, Asona Lui, Wesley K. Thompson, Marı́a Elena Martı́nez, Rosalind A. Eeles, Zsofia Kote‐Jarai, Kenneth Muir, Artitaya Lophatananon, Johanna Schleutker, Nora Pashayan, Jyotsna Batra, Henrik Grönberg, David E. Neal, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Catherine M. Tangen, Robert J. MacInnis, Alicja Wolk, Demetrius Albanes, Christopher A. Haiman, Ruth C. Travis, William J. Blot, Janet L. Stanford, Lorelei A. Mucci, Catharine West, Sune F. Nielsen, Adam S. Kibel, Olivier Cussenot, Sonja Berndt, Stella Koutros, Karina D. Sørensen, Cezary Cybulski, Eli Marie Grindedal, F. Ménégaux, Jong Y. Park, Sue A. Ingles, Christiane Maier, Robert J. Hamilton, Barry S. Rosenstein, Yong‐Jie Lu, Stephen Watya, Ana Vega, Manolis Kogevinas, Fredrik Wiklund, Kathryn L. Penney, Chad D. Huff, Manuel R. Teixeira, Luc Multigner, Robin J. Leach, Hermann Brenner, Esther M. John, Radka Kaneva, Christopher J. Logothetis, Susan L. Neuhausen, Kim De Ruyck, Piet Ost, Azad Hassan Abdul Razack, Lisa F. Newcomb, Jay H. Fowke, Marija Gamulin, Aswin Abraham, Frank Claessens, Jose E. Castelao, Paul A. Townsend, Dana C. Crawford, György Petrovics, Ron H. N. van Schaik, Marie‐Élise Parent, Jennifer J. Hu, Wei Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueProstate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNorges ForskningsrådProstate Cancer FoundationCancer Research UKNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerRisk stratificationOncologyPolygenic risk scoreInternal medicineCancerStratification (seeds)Hazard ratioProstate-specific antigenGeneGeneticsBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer risk stratification using single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) demonstrates considerable promise in men of European, Asian, and African genetic ancestries, but there is still need for increased accuracy. We evaluated whether including additional SNPs in a prostate cancer polygenic hazard score (PHS) would improve associations with clinically significant prostate cancer in multi-ancestry datasets. METHODS: In total, 299 SNPs previously associated with prostate cancer were evaluated for inclusion in a new PHS, using a LASSO-regularized Cox proportional hazards model in a training dataset of 72,181 men from the PRACTICAL Consortium. The PHS model was evaluated in four testing datasets: African ancestry, Asian ancestry, and two of European Ancestry-the Cohort of Swedish Men (COSM) and the ProtecT study. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare men with high versus low PHS for association with clinically significant, with any, and with fatal prostate cancer. The impact of genetic risk stratification on the positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was also measured. RESULTS: The final model (PHS290) had 290 SNPs with non-zero coefficients. Comparing, for example, the highest and lowest quintiles of PHS290, the hazard ratios (HRs) for clinically significant prostate cancer were 13.73 [95% CI: 12.43-15.16] in ProtecT, 7.07 [6.58-7.60] in African ancestry, 10.31 [9.58-11.11] in Asian ancestry, and 11.18 [10.34-12.09] in COSM. Similar results were seen for association with any and fatal prostate cancer. Without PHS stratification, the PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer in ProtecT was 0.12 (0.11-0.14). For the top 20% and top 5% of PHS290, the PPV of PSA testing was 0.19 (0.15-0.22) and 0.26 (0.19-0.33), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate better genetic risk stratification for clinically significant prostate cancer than prior versions of PHS in multi-ancestry datasets. This is promising for implementing precision-medicine approaches to prostate cancer screening decisions in diverse populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProstate Cancer and Prostatic DiseasesSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207