Polygenic Risk and Chemotherapy-Related Subsequent Malignancies in Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and St Jude Lifetime Cohort Study Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Chemotherapeutic exposures are associated with subsequent malignant neoplasm (SMN) risk. The role of genetic susceptibility in chemotherapy-related SMNs should be defined as use of radiation therapy (RT) decreases. PATIENTS AND METHODS SMNs among long-term childhood cancer survivors of European (EUR; N = 9,895) and African (AFR; N = 718) genetic ancestry from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and St Jude Lifetime Cohort Study were evaluated. An externally validated 179-variant polygenic risk score (PRS) associated with pleiotropic adult cancer risk from the UK Biobank Study (N > 400,000) was computed for each survivor. SMN cumulative incidence comparing top and bottom PRS quintiles was estimated, along with hazard ratios (HRs) from proportional hazards models. RESULTS A total of 1,594 survivors developed SMNs, with basal cell carcinomas (n = 822), breast cancers (n = 235), and thyroid cancers (n = 221) being the most frequent. Although SMN risk associations with the PRS were extremely modest in RT-exposed EUR survivors (HR, 1.22; P = .048; n = 4,630), the increase in 30-year SMN cumulative incidence and HRs comparing top and bottom PRS quintiles was statistically significant among nonirradiated EUR survivors (n = 4,322) treated with alkylating agents (17% v 6%; HR, 2.46; P < .01), anthracyclines (20% v 8%; HR, 2.86; P < .001), epipodophyllotoxins (23% v 1%; HR, 12.20; P < .001), or platinums (46% v 7%; HR, 8.58; P < .01). This PRS also significantly modified epipodophyllotoxin-related SMN risk among nonirradiated AFR survivors (n = 414; P < .01). Improvements in prediction attributable to the PRS were greatest for epipodophyllotoxin-exposed (AUC, 0.71 v 0.63) and platinum-exposed (AUC,0.68 v 0.58) survivors. CONCLUSION A pleiotropic cancer PRS has strong potential for improving SMN clinical risk stratification among nonirradiated survivors treated with specific chemotherapies. A polygenic risk screening approach may be a valuable complement to an early screening strategy on the basis of treatments and rare cancer-susceptibility mutations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".