MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399661160 · doi:10.1159/000539520

A statistical testing strategy accounting for random and non-random (skewed) X-chromosome inactivation identifies lung cancer susceptibility loci among smokers

2024· article· en· W4399661160 on OpenAlexaff
Rodolphe Jantzen, Sophie Camilleri‐Broët, Nicole Ezer, Philippe Broët

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Heredity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerBiologyGeneticsLung cancer susceptibilityCancerEpidemiologyIncidence (geometry)ChromosomeOncologyInternal medicineMedicineGenotypeGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide in mortality and the second in incidence. Epidemiological studies found a higher lung cancer risk for smoking women in comparison to men, but these sex differences, irrespective of smoking habits, remain controversial. One of the hypotheses concerns the genetic contribution of the sex chromosomes. However, while genome-wide association studies identified many lung cancer susceptibility loci, these analyses have excluded X-linked loci. METHODS: To account for nongenetic factors, we first presented an association test based on an additive-multiplicative hazard model accounting for random/nonrandom X-inactivation process. A simulation study was performed to investigate the properties of the proposed test as compared with the Wald test from a Cox model with random X-inactivation process and the partial likelihood ratio test proposed by Xu et al. accounting for nonrandom X-inactivation process. Then, we performed an X chromosome-wide association study on 9,261 individuals from the population-based cohort CARTaGENE to identify susceptibility loci for lung cancer among current and past smokers. We adjusted for the PLCOm2012 lung cancer risk score used in screening programs. RESULTS: Simulation results show the good behavior of the proposed test in terms of power and type I error probability as compared to the Xu et al. and the Wald test. Using the proposed test statistic and adjusting for the PLCOm2012 score, the X chromosome-wide statistical analysis identified two SNPs in low-linkage disequilibrium located in the IL1RAPL1 (IL-1 R accessory protein-like) gene: rs12558491 (p = 2.75×10-9) and rs12835699 (p = 1.26×10-6). For both SNPs, the minor allele was associated with lower lung cancer risk. Adjusting for multiple testing, no signal was detected using the Wald or the Xu et al. likelihood ratio tests. CONCLUSION: By taking into account smoking behavior and the X-inactivation process, the investigation of the X chromosome has shed a new light on the association between X-linked loci and lung cancer. We identified two loci associated with lung cancer located in the IL1RAPL1 gene. This finding would have been overlooked by examining only results from other test statistics.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.165
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.165
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman HereditySame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207