Large-scale genome-wide association study of 398,238 women unveils seven novel loci associated with high-grade serous epithelial ovarian cancer risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Nineteen genomic regions have been associated with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). We used data from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC), Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 / BRCA2 (CIMBA), UK Biobank (UKBB), and FinnGen to identify novel HGSOC susceptibility loci and develop polygenic scores (PGS). Methods We analyzed >22 million variants for 398,238 women. Associations were assessed separately by consortium and meta-analysed. OCAC and CIMBA data were used to develop PGS which were trained on FinnGen data and validated in UKBB and BioBank Japan Results Eight novel variants were associated with HGSOC risk. An interesting discovery biologically was finding that TP53 3’-UTR SNP rs78378222 was associated with HGSOC (per T allele relative risk (RR)=1.44, 95%CI:1.28-1.62, P=1.76×10 -9 ). The optimal PGS included 64,518 variants and was associated with an odds ratio of 1.46 (95%CI:1.37-1.54) per standard deviation in the UKBB validation (AUROC curve=0.61, 95%CI:0.59-0.62). Conclusions This study represents the largest GWAS for HGSOC to date. The results highlight that improvements in imputation reference panels and increased sample sizes can identify HGSOC associated variants that previously went undetected, resulting in improved PGS. The use of updated PGS in cancer risk prediction algorithms will then improve personalized risk prediction for HGSOC.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".