MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402468316 · doi:10.1101/2024.09.10.24313450

Integrating multi-tissue expression and splicing data to prioritise anatomical subsite- and sex-specific colorectal cancer susceptibility genes with therapeutic potential

2024· preprint· en· W4402468316 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Hazelwood, Daffodil M. Canson, Xue Min Wang, Pik Fang Kho, Danny Legge, Andrei‐Emil Constantinescu, Matthew A. Lee, D. Timothy Bishop, Andrew T. Chan, Stephen B. Gruber, Jochen Hampe, Loı̈c Le Marchand, Michael O. Woods, Rish K. Pai, Stephanie L. Schmit, Jane C. Figueiredo, Wei Zheng, Jeroen R. Huyghe, Neil Murphy, Marc J. Gunter, Tom G. Richardson, Vicki Whitehall, Emma E. Vincent, Dylan M. Glubb, Tracy A. O’Mara

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersOffice of Research Infrastructure Programs, National Institutes of HealthMedical Research CouncilUniversity of BristolFred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterNational Health and Medical Research CouncilHarold Hyam Wingate FoundationNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesCancer Research UKEuropean Association for Cancer Research
KeywordsBiologyGeneColorectal cancerGenome-wide association studyTranscriptomeExpression quantitative trait lociGeneticsGene expressionComputational biologyCancerBioinformaticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerous potential susceptibility genes have been identified for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, it remains unclear which genes have a causal role in CRC risk, whether these genes are associated with specific types of CRC, and if they have potential for therapeutic targeting. We performed a multi-tissue transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) across six relevant normal tissues (n=187-670) and applied a causal framework (involving Mendelian randomisation and genetic colocalisation) to prioritise causal associations between gene expression or splicing events and CRC risk (52,775 cases; 45,940 controls), incorporating sex- and anatomical subsite-specific analyses. We identified 35 genes with robust evidence for a potential causal role in CRC, including ten genes not previously identified by TWAS. Among these genes, SEMA4D emerged as a significant discovery; it is not located at any established CRC genome-wide association study (GWAS) risk locus and its encoded protein is targeted by an antibody currently being clinically studied for CRC treatment. Several genes showed increased expression associated with CRC risk and evidence of CRC cell dependency in CRISPR screen analyses, highlighting their potential as targets for therapeutic inhibition. A female-specific association with CRC risk was observed for CCM2 expression, which is involved in progesterone signalling pathways. Subsite-specific associations were also found, including a link between rectal cancer risk and expression of LAMC1 , which encodes a target for a clinically approved drug. Additionally, we performed a focused analysis of established drug targets to further identify potential therapies for CRC, revealing PDCD1 , the product of which (PD-1) is targeted by a clinically approved CRC immunotherapy. In summary, our comprehensive analysis provides valuable insights into the molecular underpinnings of CRC and supports promising avenues for therapeutic intervention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer→French-language works237,207→