ArticleNature communications2017
Inequality in genetic cancer risk suggests bad genes rather than bad luck.
Article in Nature communications, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unobserved individual-level variation in cardiovascular mortality in birth cohorts born before and after 1945.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Individual heterogeneity, educational attainment and cardiovascular mortality: a pooled analysis of Norwegian health surveys.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Latent Archetypes of the Spatial Patterns of Cancer.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- From Chaos to Opportunity: Decoding Cancer Heterogeneity for Enhanced Treatment Strategies.Biology · 2023Review
- Review
- Building a richer understanding of diversity through causally consistent evenness measures.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Fatty Acids and Membrane Lipidomics in Oncology: A Cross-Road of Nutritional, Signaling and Metabolic Pathways.Metabolites · 2020Review
- Analysis of 153 115 patients with hematological malignancies refines the spectrum of familial risk.Blood · 2019Article
- Introducing risk inequality metrics in tuberculosis policy development.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Effect of increased body mass index on risk of diagnosis or death from cancer.British journal of cancer · 2019Article
- The surprising implications of familial association in disease risk.BMC public health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heritability is often estimated by decomposing the variance of a trait into genetic and other factors. Interpreting such variance decompositions, however, is not straightforward. In particular, there is an ongoing debate on the importance of genetic factors in cancer development, even though heritability estimates exist. Here we show that heritability estimates contain information on the distribution of absolute risk due to genetic differences. The approach relies on the assumptions underlying the conventional heritability of liability model. We also suggest a model unrelated to heritability estimates. By applying these strategies, we describe the distribution of absolute genetic risk for 15 common cancers. We highlight the considerable inequality in genetic risk of cancer using different metrics, e.g., the Gini Index and quantile ratios which are frequently used in economics. For all these cancers, the estimated inequality in genetic risk is larger than the inequality in income in the USA.
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.