ArticleInternational journal of cancer2026
Integrating polygenic and methylation risk scores for pleural mesothelioma risk stratification.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Integrating polygenic and methylation risk scores for pleural mesothelioma risk stratification.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is a lethal cancer primarily caused by asbestos exposure. Not all exposed individuals develop PM, suggesting the involvement of additional factors. This underscores the need for robust predictive models integrating biomarkers from multi-omic domains to improve risk stratification and early detection. We developed and evaluated polygenic risk scores (PRS) and methylation risk scores (MRS) using a retrospective case-control study (749 participants: 387 PM cases, 362 controls) and a nested case-control European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Meso study (268 participants: 134 preclinical PM cases, 134 matched controls) within the EPIC cohort. Genome-wide association analyses in the retrospective case-control study identified PM-associated variants. The PRS (1123 SNPs with p < 0.001) in the retrospective training subset stratified disease risk in the test set (ORs 3.46-9.54 across top percentiles) and improved model discrimination (AUC = 0.75 vs. 0.71 in baseline model, p = 0.04). In EPIC-Meso, PRS performance was limited (AUC = 0.52). External validation in the UK-Biobank (UKBB) confirmed a modest but consistent association with PM-risk. A Meta-PRS derived from the UKBB-FinnGen meta-analysis replicated this trend in the full retrospective dataset, showing higher OR across top percentiles (2.5-12.3) and improved discrimination (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.72, p = 0.016). MRS, with 68 differentially methylated CpGs (effect-size >|0.10|, FDR p < 0.05) in the retrospective training set, increased the AUC from 0.66 to 0.85 (p < 0.001) in the test set and from 0.51 to 0.62 in EPIC-Meso. PRS was most predictive in low-exposure groups, while MRS remained robust across exposure levels. Combined PRS-MRS models improved discrimination. Integrating multi-omic biomarkers can enhance PM-risk stratification and support earlier, targeted interventions in high-risk asbestos-exposed groups.
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.