SynthesisGenome medicine2023
Risk assessment for colorectal cancer via polygenic risk score and lifestyle exposure: a large-scale association study of East Asian and European populations.
Synthesis in Genome medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome-wide meta-analysis across East Asian and European populations provides insights into the molecular basis of lung cancer.Genome medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Cross-cohort analysis identifies shared gut microbial signatures and validates microbial risk scores for colorectal cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Trans-ancestry analysis in over 799,000 individuals yields new insights into the genetic etiology of colorectal cancer.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Ancestry-Calibrated Polygenic Risk Scores Predict PTSD Trajectories in Recent Trauma Survivors and Interact with Neighborhood Resources.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Interaction of genetic and lifestyle risk scores on colorectal cancer risk across 5 racial and ethnic populations.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Smoking metabolic signature modifies the risk of colorectal cancer and interacts with genetic susceptibility: a large-scale prospective cohort study.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Type 2 Diabetes, Glycemic Traits and Overall Cancer Risk: A Large-Scale Prospective Cohort Study.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Single-Cell Analysis Identified a Recurrent Malignant-Associated Transcriptional State in Colorectal Cancer.Cancer science · 2026Article
- Optimizing colorectal cancer screening through polygenic risk score-based risk stratification: evidence from a population-based cohort and screening trial.Genome medicine · 2026Article
- Polygenic risk scores: Navigating the future of precision medicine through economic, ethical, and scientific advancements.iScience · 2026Review
- Burden and forecast of colorectal cancer in the selected East Asian countries (1990-2036): a systematic analysis based on the global burden of disease study 2021.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Cuproptosis-Related Ferroptosis Gene Signature: A Prognostic Tool for Colon Cancer Patients.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Modified predictive model incorporating the waist-to-hip ratio for advanced colorectal neoplasia: A step toward precision screening.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Integrating single-cell with transcriptome-proteome Mendelian randomization reveals colorectal cancer targets.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Deciphering the impact of dietary habits and behavioral patterns on colorectal cancer.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Review
- Article
- Candidate Genetic Loci Modifying the Colorectal Cancer Risk Caused by Lifestyle Risk Factors.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Lifestyle Modify Optic Nerve Injury in Mendelian Randomization.Genetics research · 2025Article
- Article
- Colorectal cancer risk stratification using a polygenic risk score in symptomatic primary care patients-a UK Biobank retrospective cohort study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe genetic architectures of colorectal cancer are distinct across different populations. To date, the majority of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are derived from European (EUR) populations, which limits their accurate extrapolation to other populations. Here, we aimed to generate a PRS by incorporating East Asian (EAS) and EUR ancestry groups and validate its utility for colorectal cancer risk assessment among different populations.
methodsA large-scale colorectal cancer genome-wide association study (GWAS), harboring 35,145 cases and 288,934 controls from EAS and EUR populations, was used for the EAS-EUR GWAS meta-analysis and the construction of candidate EAS-EUR PRSs via different approaches. The performance of each PRS was then validated in external GWAS datasets of EAS (727 cases and 1452 controls) and EUR (1289 cases and 1284 controls) ancestries, respectively. The optimal PRS was further tested using the UK Biobank longitudinal cohort of 355,543 individuals and ultimately applied to stratify individual risk attached by healthy lifestyle.
resultsIn the meta-analysis across EAS and EUR populations, we identified 48 independent variants beyond genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10
conclusionsIn summary, we systemically constructed an EAS-EUR PRS to effectively stratify colorectal cancer risk, which highlighted its clinical implication among diverse ancestries. Importantly, these findings also supported that a healthy lifestyle could reduce the genetic impact on incident colorectal cancer.
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.