MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404087787 · doi:10.1101/2024.11.03.24316516

From a genomic risk model to clinical trial implementation in a learning health system: the ProGRESS Study

2024· preprint· en· W4404087787 on OpenAlexaff
Jason L. Vassy, Anna Dornisch, Roshan Karunamuni, Michael Gatzen, Christopher Kachulis, Niall J. Lennon, Charles A. Brunette, Morgan E. Danowski, Richard L. Hauger, Isla P. Garraway, Adam S. Kibel, Kyung Min Lee, Julie A. Lynch, Kara N. Maxwell, Brent S. Rose, Craig C. Teerlink, George J Xu, Sean E Hofherr, Katherine A Lafferty, Katie Larkin, Edyta Małolepsza, Candace Patterson, Diana M. Toledo, Jenny Donovan, Freddie C. Hamdy, Richard M. Martin, David E. Neal, Emma L. Turner, Ole A. Andreassen, Anders M. Dale, Ian G. Mills, Jyotsna Batra, Judith Clements, Olivier Cussenot, Cezary Cybulski, Rosalind A. Eeles, Jay H. Fowke, Eli Marie Grindedal, Robert J. Hamilton, Jasmine Lim, Yong‐Jie Lu, Robert J. MacInnis, Christiane Maier, Lorelei A. Mucci, Luc Multigner, Susan L. Neuhausen, Sune F. Nielsen, Marie‐Élise Parent, Jong Y. Park, György Petrovics, Anna Plym, Azad Razack, Barry S. Rosenstein, Johanna Schleutker, Karina D. Sørensen, Ruth C. Travis, Ana del Carmen Armas Vega, Catharine West, Fredrik Wiklund, Wei Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiobankProstate cancerMedicineHealth carePrecision medicineCohortPercentileCancerOncologyFamily medicineInternal medicineBioinformaticsStatisticsBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background As healthcare moves from a one-size-fits-all approach towards precision care, individual risk prediction is an important step in disease prevention and early detection. Biobank-linked healthcare systems can generate knowledge about genomic risk and test the impact of implementing that knowledge in care. Risk-stratified prostate cancer screening is one clinical application that might benefit from such an approach. Methods We developed a clinical translation pipeline for genomics-informed prostate cancer screening in a national healthcare system. We used data from 585,418 male participants of the Veterans Affairs (VA) Million Veteran Program (MVP), among whom 101,920 self-identify as Black/African-American, to develop and validate the Prostate CAncer integrated Risk Evaluation (P-CARE) model, a prostate cancer risk prediction model based on a polygenic score, family history, and genetic principal components. The model was externally validated in data from 18,457 PRACTICAL Consortium participants. A novel blended genome-exome (BGE) platform was used to develop a clinical laboratory assay for both the P-CARE model and rare variants in prostate cancer-associated genes, including additional validation in 74,331 samples from the All of Us Research Program. Results In overall and ancestry-stratified analyses, the polygenic score of 601 variants was associated with any, metastatic, and fatal prostate cancer in MVP and PRACTICAL. Values of the P-CARE model at ≥80th percentile in the multiancestry cohort overall were associated with hazard ratios (HR) of 2.75 (95% CI 2.66-2.84), 2.78 (95% CI 2.54-2.99), and 2.59 (95% CI 2.22-2.97) for any, metastatic, and fatal prostate cancer in MVP, respectively, compared to the median. When high– and low-risk groups were defined as P-CARE HR>1.5 and HR<0.75 for metastatic prostate cancer, the 220,062 (37.6%) high-risk vs.146,826 (25.1%) low-risk participants in MVP had a 47.9% vs. 14.1%, 9.3% vs. 2.0%, and 3.6% vs. 0.8% cumulative cause-specific incidence of any, metastatic, and fatal prostate cancer by age 90, respectively. The clinical assay and reports are now being implemented in a clinical trial of precision prostate cancer screening in the VA healthcare system (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05926102 ). Conclusions A model consisting of a polygenic score, family history, and genetic principal components describes a clinically important gradient of prostate cancer risk in a diverse patient population and demonstrates the potential of learning health systems to implement and evaluate precision health care approaches.

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)0.131
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.310
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1310.310
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→