Identification of genetically predicted DNA methylation markers associated with non–small cell lung cancer risk among 34,964 cases and 448,579 controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the associations between genetic variations and lung cancer risk have been explored, the epigenetic consequences of DNA methylation in lung cancer development are largely unknown. Here, the genetically predicted DNA methylation markers associated with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) risk by a two-stage case-control design were investigated. METHODS: The genetic prediction models for methylation levels based on genetic and methylation data of 1595 subjects from the Framingham Heart Study were established. The prediction models were applied to a fixed-effect meta-analysis of screening data sets with 27,120 NSCLC cases and 27,355 controls to identify the methylation markers, which were then replicated in independent data sets with 7844 lung cancer cases and 421,224 controls. Also performed was a multi-omics functional annotation for the identified CpGs by integrating genomics, epigenomics, and transcriptomics and investigation of the potential regulation pathways. RESULTS: ), including four novel CpGs. Multi-omics functional annotation showed nine of 16 CpGs were potentially functional biomarkers for NSCLC risk. Thirty-five genes within a 1-Mb window of 12 CpGs that might be involved in regulatory pathways of NSCLC risk were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Sixteen promising DNA methylation markers associated with NSCLC were identified. Changes of the methylation level at these CpGs might influence the development of NSCLC by regulating the expression of genes nearby. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The epigenetic consequences of DNA methylation in lung cancer development are still largely unknown. This study used summary data of large-scale genome-wide association studies to investigate the associations between genetically predicted levels of methylation biomarkers and non-small cell lung cancer risk at the first time. This study looked at how well larotrectinib worked in adult patients with sarcomas caused by TRK fusion proteins. These findings will provide a unique insight into the epigenetic susceptibility mechanisms of lung cancer.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".