Germline Genetic Variants Associated with Somatic <i>TMPRSS2:ERG</i> Fusion Status in Prostate Cancer: A Genome-Wide Association Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prostate cancer subtype defined by the presence of TMPRSS2:ERG has been shown to be molecularly and epidemiologically distinct. However, few studies have investigated germline genetic variants associating with TMPRSS2:ERG fusion status. METHODS: We performed a genome-wide association study with 396 TMPRSS2:ERG(+) cases, 390 TMPRSS2:ERG(-) cases, and 2,386 cancer-free controls from the Physicians' Health Study (PHS), the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS), and a Seattle-based Fred Hutchinson (FH) Cancer Center Prostate Cancer Study. We applied logistic regression models to test the associations between ∼5 million SNPs with TMPRSS2:ERG fusion status accounting for population stratification. RESULTS: We did not identify genome-wide significant variants comparing the TMPRSS2:ERG(+) to the TMPRSS2:ERG(-) prostate cancer cases in the meta-analysis. When comparing TMPRSS2:ERG(+) prostate cancer cases with controls without prostate cancer, 10 genome-wide significant SNPs on chromosome 17q24.3 were observed in the meta-analysis. When comparing TMPRSS2:ERG(-) prostate cancer cases with controls without prostate cancer, two SNPs on chromosome 8q24.21 in the meta-analysis reached genome-wide significance. CONCLUSIONS: We observed SNPs at several known prostate cancer risk loci (17q24.3, 1q32.1, and 8q24.21) that were differentially and exclusively associated with the risk of developing prostate tumors either with or without the gene fusion. IMPACT: Our findings suggest that tumors with the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion exhibit a different germline genetic etiology compared with fusion negative cases.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".