ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Allostatic load, genetic susceptibility, and lung cancer risk: Evidence from a prospective cohort and integrative proteomic analyses.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Allostatic load (AL), a composite measure of multisystem dysregulation associated with chronic stress, has been linked to lung cancer risk. However, its joint effects with genetic susceptibility and the biological pathways underlying this relationship remain unclear. We conducted a prospective cohort study of 336,945 UK Biobank participants to assess associations between AL and lung cancer incidence and its histological subtypes. A polygenic risk score was constructed to evaluate the joint associations of AL and genetic susceptibility. We further assessed whether AL provided incremental risk stratification beyond established low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening eligibility frameworks and integrated plasma proteomic data using machine learning, enrichment, and mediation analyses. We found that higher AL was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (per-unit HR = 1.073, 95% CI: 1.053-1.094; Low vs. Normal HR = 1.284, 95% CI: 1.065-1.547; High vs. Normal HR = 1.629, 95% CI: 1.347-1.971). Subtype analyses revealed the strongest effect for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), with significant associations also observed for lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. High AL combined with high genetic risk was associated with a 136.9% increased risk (HR = 2.369, 95% CI: 1.565-3.583), without evidence of interaction. AL provided additional risk discrimination beyond established LDCT screening eligibility criteria. Proteomic analyses identified 111 AL-associated proteins and 34 proteins with potential mediation signal, including HGF, RARRES2, and GDF15, implicating inflammatory, metabolic, and growth factor-related processes as biological correlates of the AL-lung cancer association. In conclusion, higher AL was independently associated with lung cancer risk, particularly SCLC. Integrative proteomic analyses provided exploratory evidence for biological pathways that may link cumulative physiological dysregulation to lung carcinogenesis. Incorporating AL, as a composite biomarker reflecting cumulative physiological burden, into risk models may improve risk stratification and help identify individuals at elevated risk.
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.