ArticleOncotarget2017
Risk assessment models for genetic risk predictors of lung cancer using two-stage replication for Asian and European populations.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The current state of polygenic scores for the development of lung cancer: a systematic review and validation in UK Biobank.British journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of lung cancer risk prediction models.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Pooled it
- Ethnicity-specific association between TERT rs2736100 (A > C) polymorphism and lung cancer risk: a comprehensive meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Necessity of organized low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: From epidemiologic comparisons between China and the Western nations.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Genome-wide association study for lung cancer in 6531 African Americans reveals new susceptibility loci.Human molecular genetics · 2025Article
- Prediction of lung cancer risk in Chinese population with genetic-environment factor using extreme gradient boosting.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Individual and joint contributions of genetic and methylation risk scores for enhancing lung cancer risk stratification: data from a population-based cohort in Germany.Clinical epigenetics · 2020Article
- Systematic evaluation of cancer-specific genetic risk score for 11 types of cancer in The Cancer Genome Atlas and Electronic Medical Records and Genomics cohorts.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
- Determining Risk of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Based on Epidemiologic Factors and Genetic Variants.Gastroenterology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past ten years, great successes have been accumulated by taking advantage of both candidate-gene studies and genome-wide association studies. However, limited studies were available to systematically evaluate the genetic effects for lung cancer risk with large-scale and different ethnic populations. We systematically reviewed relevant literatures and filtered out 241 important genetic variants identified in 124 articles. A two-stage case-control study within specific subgroups was performed to assess the effects [Training set: 2,331 cases vs. 3,077 controls (Chinese population); testing set: 1,937 cases vs. 1,984 controls (European population)]. Variable selection and model development were used LASSO penalized regression and genetic risk score (GRS) system. Further change in area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) made by the epidemiologic model with and without GRS was used to compare predictions. It kept 38 genetic variants in our study and the ratios of lung cancer risk for subjects in the upper quartile GRS was three times higher compared to that in the low quartile (odds ratio: 4.64, 95% CI: 3.87-5.56). In addition, we found that adding genetic predictors to smoking risk factor-only model improved lung cancer predictive value greatly: AUC, 0.610 versus 0.697 (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.