ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2024
Using clinical and genetic risk factors for risk prediction of 8 cancers in the UK Biobank.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical usefulness of polygenic risk scores in risk prediction models for lung cancer screening and lung nodule management.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Early-life rotavirus infection susceptibility and later gastrointestinal cancer protection: Reverse antagonistic pleiotropy and potential vaccine benefits.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026Article
- Lifetime water arsenic, genetic susceptibility, and bladder cancer in the New England Bladder Cancer Study.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Polygenic Score Complements Family History and Lynch Syndrome Genes for Predicting Colorectal Cancer Risk.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Estimating Cancer Penetrance in Carriers of BRCA2 Pathogenic Variants Using Cancer-Specific Polygenic Scores.Cancer medicine · 2025Observational
- Review
- Review
- Utilization of molecular genetic approaches for colorectal cancer screening.World journal of gastroenterology · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundModels with polygenic risk scores and clinical factors to predict risk of different cancers have been developed, but these models have been limited by the polygenic risk score-derivation methods and the incomplete selection of clinical variables.
methodsWe used UK Biobank to train the best polygenic risk scores for 8 cancers (bladder, breast, colorectal, kidney, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancers) and select relevant clinical variables from 733 baseline traits through extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). Combining polygenic risk scores and clinical variables, we developed Cox proportional hazards models for risk prediction in these cancers.
resultsOur models achieved high prediction accuracy for 8 cancers, with areas under the curve ranging from 0.618 (95% confidence interval = 0.581 to 0.655) for ovarian cancer to 0.831 (95% confidence interval = 0.817 to 0.845) for lung cancer. Additionally, our models could identify individuals at a high risk for developing cancer. For example, the risk of breast cancer for individuals in the top 5% score quantile was nearly 13 times greater than for individuals in the lowest 10%. Furthermore, we observed a higher proportion of individuals with high polygenic risk scores in the early-onset group but a higher proportion of individuals at high clinical risk in the late-onset group.
conclusionOur models demonstrated the potential to predict cancer risk and identify high-risk individuals with great generalizability to different cancers. Our findings suggested that the polygenic risk score model is more predictive for the cancer risk of early-onset patients than for late-onset patients, while the clinical risk model is more predictive for late-onset patients. Meanwhile, combining polygenic risk scores and clinical risk factors has overall better predictive performance than using polygenic risk scores or clinical risk factors alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.