MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283738813 · doi:10.1038/s41698-022-00281-9

Deciphering associations between three RNA splicing-related genetic variants and lung cancer risk

2022· article· en· W4283738813 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenjun Yang, Hongliang Liu, Ruoxin Zhang, Jennifer A. Freedman, Younghun Han, Rayjean J. Hung, Yonathan Brhane, John McLaughlin, Paul Brennan, Heike Bickeboeller, Albert Rosenberger, Richard S. Houlston, Neil E. Caporaso, Maria Teresa Landi, Irene Brueske, Angela Risch, David C. Christiani, Christopher I. Amos, Xiaoxin Chen, Steven R. Patierno, Qingyi Wei

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Precision Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute on Drug AbuseEuropean Regional Development FundNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstBundesamt für StrahlenschutzWorld Health OrganizationCancer Research UKWellcome TrustUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterCancer Care OntarioCancer Prevention and Research Institute of TexasNorges ForskningsrådGeorgetown UniversityFoundation for the National Institutes of HealthHenry Ford Health SystemAmerican Cancer SocietyUniversity of Colorado DenverDeutsche KrebshilfeNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of PittsburghJohns Hopkins UniversityRoy Castle Lung Cancer FoundationUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsLung cancerRNA splicingSingle-nucleotide polymorphismBiologyGeneAlternative splicingRNAGenome-wide association studyGeneticsSNPGene expressionGene expression profilingBioinformaticsOncologyMedicineGenotypeMessenger RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limited efforts have been made in assessing the effect of genome-wide profiling of RNA splicing-related variation on lung cancer risk. In the present study, we first identified RNA splicing-related genetic variants linked to lung cancer in a genome-wide profiling analysis and then conducted a two-stage (discovery and replication) association study in populations of European ancestry. Discovery and validation were conducted sequentially with a total of 29,266 cases and 56,450 controls from both the Transdisciplinary Research in Cancer of the Lung and the International Lung Cancer Consortium as well as the OncoArray database. For those variants identified as significant in the two datasets, we further performed stratified analyses by smoking status and histological type and investigated their effects on gene expression and potential regulatory mechanisms. We identified three genetic variants significantly associated with lung cancer risk: rs329118 in JADE2 (P = 8.80E-09), rs2285521 in GGA2 (P = 4.43E-08), and rs198459 in MYRF (P = 1.60E-06). The combined effects of all three SNPs were more evident in lung squamous cell carcinomas (P = 1.81E-08, P = 6.21E-08, and P = 7.93E-04, respectively) than in lung adenocarcinomas and in ever smokers (P = 9.80E-05, P = 2.70E-04, and P = 2.90E-05, respectively) than in never smokers. Gene expression quantitative trait analysis suggested a role for the SNPs in regulating transcriptional expression of the corresponding target genes. In conclusion, we report that three RNA splicing-related genetic variants contribute to lung cancer susceptibility in European populations. However, additional validation is needed, and specific splicing mechanisms of the target genes underlying the observed associations also warrants further exploration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Precision OncologySame topicRNA modifications and cancerFrench-language works237,207