ArticleBMC genomics2018
Stepwise approach to SNP-set analysis illustrated with the Metabochip and colorectal cancer in Japanese Americans of the Multiethnic Cohort.
Article in BMC genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent evolution of risk analyses in atomic bomb survivor studies: new methods and applications.Carcinogenesis · 2025Review
- Article
- Diet-mediated gut microbial community modulation and signature metabolites as potential biomarkers for early diagnosis, prognosis, prevention and stage-specific treatment of colorectal cancer.Journal of advanced research · 2023Review
- Views on GWAS statistical analysis.Bioinformation · 2020Article
- Model-based clustering for identifying disease-associated SNPs in case-control genome-wide association studies.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCommon variants have explained less than the amount of heritability expected for complex diseases, which has led to interest in less-common variants and more powerful approaches to the analysis of whole-genome scans. Because of low frequency (low statistical power), less-common variants are best analyzed using SNP-set methods such as gene-set or pathway-based analyses. However, there is as yet no clear consensus regarding how to focus in on potential risk variants following set-based analyses. We used a stepwise, telescoping approach to analyze common- and rare-variant data from the Illumina Metabochip array to assess genomic association with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Japanese sub-population of the Multiethnic Cohort (676 cases, 7180 controls). We started with pathway analysis of SNPs that are in genes and pathways having known mechanistic roles in colorectal cancer, then focused on genes within the pathways that evidenced association with CRC, and finally assessed individual SNPs within the genes that evidenced association. Pathway SNPs downloaded from the dbSNP database were cross-matched with Metabochip SNPs and analyzed using the logistic kernel machine regression approach (logistic SNP-set kernel-machine association test, or sequence kernel association test; SKAT) and related methods.
resultsThe TGF-β and WNT pathways were associated with all CRC, and the WNT pathway was associated with colon cancer. Individual genes demonstrating the strongest associations were TGFBR2 in the TGF-β pathway and SMAD7 (which is involved in both the TGF-β and WNT pathways). As partial validation of our approach, a known CRC risk variant in SMAD7 (in both the TGF-β and WNT pathways: rs11874392) was associated with CRC risk in our data. We also detected two novel candidate CRC risk variants (rs13075948 and rs17025857) in TGFBR2, a gene known to be associated with CRC risk.
conclusionsA stepwise, telescoping approach identified some potentially novel risk variants associated with colorectal cancer, so it may be a useful method for following up on results of set-based SNP analyses. Further work is required to assess the statistical characteristics of the approach, and additional applications should aid in better clarifying its utility.
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.