| Title |
Large-scale association analysis identifies new lung cancer susceptibility loci and heterogeneity in genetic susceptibility across histological subtypes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Genetics, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ng.3892 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James D McKay, Rayjean J Hung, Younghun Han, Xuchen Zong, Robert Carreras-Torres, David C Christiani, Neil E Caporaso, Mattias Johansson, Xiangjun Xiao, Yafang Li, Jinyoung Byun, Alison Dunning, Karen A Pooley, David C Qian, Xuemei Ji, Geoffrey Liu, Maria N Timofeeva, Stig E Bojesen, Xifeng Wu, Loic Le Marchand, Demetrios Albanes, Heike Bickeböller, Melinda C Aldrich, William S Bush, Adonina Tardon, Gad Rennert, M Dawn Teare, John K Field, Lambertus A Kiemeney, Philip Lazarus, Aage Haugen, Stephen Lam, Matthew B Schabath, Angeline S Andrew, Hongbing Shen, Yun-Chul Hong, Jian-Min Yuan, Pier Alberto Bertazzi, Angela C Pesatori, Yuanqing Ye, Nancy Diao, Li Su, Ruyang Zhang, Yonathan Brhane, Natasha Leighl, Jakob S Johansen, Anders Mellemgaard, Walid Saliba, Christopher A Haiman, Lynne R Wilkens, Ana Fernandez-Somoano, Guillermo Fernandez-Tardon, Henricus F M van der Heijden, Jin Hee Kim, Juncheng Dai, Zhibin Hu, Michael P A Davies, Michael W Marcus, Hans Brunnström, Jonas Manjer, Olle Melander, David C Muller, Kim Overvad, Antonia Trichopoulou, Rosario Tumino, Jennifer A Doherty, Matt P Barnett, Chu Chen, Gary E Goodman, Angela Cox, Fiona Taylor, Penella Woll, Irene Brüske, H-Erich Wichmann, Judith Manz, Thomas R Muley, Angela Risch, Albert Rosenberger, Kjell Grankvist, Mikael Johansson, Frances A Shepherd, Ming-Sound Tsao, Susanne M Arnold, Eric B Haura, Ciprian Bolca, Ivana Holcatova, Vladimir Janout, Milica Kontic, Jolanta Lissowska, Anush Mukeria, Simona Ognjanovic, Tadeusz M Orlowski, Ghislaine Scelo, Beata Swiatkowska, David Zaridze, Per Bakke, Vidar Skaug, Shanbeh Zienolddiny, Eric J Duell, Lesley M Butler, Woon-Puay Koh, Yu-Tang Gao, Richard S Houlston, John McLaughlin, Victoria L Stevens, Philippe Joubert, Maxime Lamontagne, David C Nickle, Ma'en Obeidat, Wim Timens, Bin Zhu, Lei Song, Linda Kachuri, María Soler Artigas, Martin D Tobin, Louise V Wain, Thorunn Rafnar, Thorgeir E Thorgeirsson, Gunnar W Reginsson, Kari Stefansson, Dana B Hancock, Laura J Bierut, Margaret R Spitz, Nathan C Gaddis, Sharon M Lutz, Fangyi Gu, Eric O Johnson, Ahsan Kamal, Claudio Pikielny, Dakai Zhu, Sara Lindströem, Xia Jiang, Rachel F Tyndale, Georgia Chenevix-Trench, Jonathan Beesley, Yohan Bossé, Stephen Chanock, Paul Brennan, Maria Teresa Landi, Christopher I Amos |
| Abstract |
Although several lung cancer susceptibility loci have been identified, much of the heritability for lung cancer remains unexplained. Here 14,803 cases and 12,262 controls of European descent were genotyped on the OncoArray and combined with existing data for an aggregated genome-wide association study (GWAS) analysis of lung cancer in 29,266 cases and 56,450 controls. We identified 18 susceptibility loci achieving genome-wide significance, including 10 new loci. The new loci highlight the striking heterogeneity in genetic susceptibility across the histological subtypes of lung cancer, with four loci associated with lung cancer overall and six loci associated with lung adenocarcinoma. Gene expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) analysis in 1,425 normal lung tissue samples highlights RNASET2, SECISBP2L and NRG1 as candidate genes. Other loci include genes such as a cholinergic nicotinic receptor, CHRNA2, and the telomere-related genes OFBC1 and RTEL1. Further exploration of the target genes will continue to provide new insights into the etiology of lung cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 25% |
| Canada | 6 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 8% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| France | 2 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 35 | 66% |
| Scientists | 12 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 345 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 344 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 63 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 54 | 16% |
| Unknown | 98 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 78 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 2% |
| Engineering | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 26 | 8% |
| Unknown | 120 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 156. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2018.
All research outputs
#267,242
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature Genetics
#483
of 7,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,636
of 335,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Genetics
#9
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,892 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.