| Title |
Genome-wide association and expression quantitative trait loci studies identify multiple susceptibility loci for thyroid cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms15966 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ho-Young Son, Yul Hwangbo, Seong-Keun Yoo, Sun-Wha Im, San Duk Yang, Soo-Jung Kwak, Min Seon Park, Soo Heon Kwak, Sun Wook Cho, Jun Sun Ryu, Jeongseon Kim, Yuh-Seog Jung, Tae Hyun Kim, Su-jin Kim, Kyu Eun Lee, Do Joon Park, Nam Han Cho, Joohon Sung, Jeong-Sun Seo, Eun Kyung Lee, Young Joo Park, Jong-Il Kim |
| Abstract |
Thyroid cancer is the most common cancer in Korea. Several susceptibility loci of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) were identified by previous genome-wide association studies (GWASs) in Europeans only. Here we conducted a GWAS and a replication study in Koreans using a total of 1,085 DTC cases and 8,884 controls, and validated these results using expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis and clinical phenotypes. The most robust associations were observed in the NRG1 gene (rs6996585, P=1.08 × 10(-10)) and this SNP was also associated with NRG1 expression in thyroid tissues. In addition, we confirmed three previously reported loci (FOXE1, NKX2-1 and DIRC3) and identified seven novel susceptibility loci (VAV3, PCNXL2, INSR, MRSB3, FHIT, SEPT11 and SLC24A6) associated with DTC. Furthermore, we identified specific variants of DTC that have different effects according to cancer type or ethnicity. Our findings provide deeper insight into the genetic contribution to thyroid cancer in different populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 | 3 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 17% |
| India | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Scientists | 2 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 11 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 10 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,581,428
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#21,048
of 47,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,997
of 312,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#461
of 920 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 47,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 312,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 920 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.