Genome-Wide Interaction Analysis of Genetic Variants With Menopausal Hormone Therapy for Colorectal Cancer Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) may interact with genetic variants to influence colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. METHODS: We conducted a genome-wide, gene-environment interaction between single nucleotide polymorphisms and the use of any MHT, estrogen only, and combined estrogen-progestogen therapy with CRC risk, among 28 486 postmenopausal women (11 519 CRC patients and 16 967 participants without CRC) from 38 studies, using logistic regression, 2-step method, and 2- or 3-degree-of-freedom joint test. A set-based score test was applied for rare genetic variants. RESULTS: The use of any MHT, estrogen only and estrogen-progestogen were associated with a reduced CRC risk (odds ratio [OR] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.64 to 0.78; OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.79; and OR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.90, respectively). The 2-step method identified a statistically significant interaction between a GRIN2B variant rs117868593 and MHT use, whereby MHT-associated CRC risk was statistically significantly reduced in women with the GG genotype (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.72) but not within strata of GC or CC genotypes. A statistically significant interaction between a DCBLD1 intronic variant at 6q22.1 (rs10782186) and MHT use was identified by the 2-degree-of-freedom joint test. The MHT-associated CRC risk was reduced with increasing number of rs10782186-C alleles, showing odds ratios of 0.78 (95% CI = 0.70 to 0.87) for TT, 0.68 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.73) for TC, and 0.66 (95% CI = 0.60 to 0.74) for CC genotypes. In addition, 5 genes in rare variant analysis showed suggestive interactions with MHT (2-sided P < 1.2 × 10-4). CONCLUSION: Genetic variants that modify the association between MHT and CRC risk were identified, offering new insights into pathways of CRC carcinogenesis and potential mechanisms involved.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".