| 1. |
- Went, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Author Correction: Identification of multiple risk loci and regulatory mechanisms influencing susceptibility to multiple myeloma
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Nature communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 10:1, s. 213-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of a member of the PRACTICAL Consortium, Manuela Gago-Dominguez, which was incorrectly given as Manuela Gago Dominguez. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. Furthermore, in the original HTML version of this Article, the order of authors within the author list was incorrect. The PRACTICAL consortium was incorrectly listed after Richard S. Houlston and should have been listed after Nora Pashayan. This error has been corrected in the HTML version of the Article; the PDF version was correct at the time of publication.
|
|
| 2. |
- Went, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Identification of multiple risk loci and regulatory mechanisms influencing susceptibility to multiple myeloma
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Nature communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 9:1, s. 3707-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have transformed our understanding of susceptibility to multiple myeloma (MM), but much of the heritability remains unexplained. We report a new GWAS, a meta-analysis with previous GWAS and a replication series, totalling 9974 MM cases and 247,556 controls of European ancestry. Collectively, these data provide evidence for six new MM risk loci, bringing the total number to 23. Integration of information from gene expression, epigenetic profiling and in situ Hi-C data for the 23 risk loci implicate disruption of developmental transcriptional regulators as a basis of MM susceptibility, compatible with altered B-cell differentiation as a key mechanism. Dysregulation of autophagy/apoptosis and cell cycle signalling feature as recurrently perturbed pathways. Our findings provide further insight into the biological basis of MM.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Hemminki, K, et al.
(författare)
-
Are twins at risk of cancer: results from the Swedish family-cancer database
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Twin research and human genetics : the official journal of the International Society for Twin Studies. - : Cambridge University Press (CUP). - 1832-4274. ; 8:5, s. 509-514
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A few twin studies on cancer have addressed questions on the possible carcinogenic or protective effects of twining by comparing the occurrence of cancer in twins and singletons. The nationwide Swedish Family-Cancer Database of 10.2 million individuals and 69,654 0- to 70-year-old twin pairs were used to calculate standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all main cancers compared to singletons. The overall risk of cancer in same- or different-sex twins was at the same level as the risk for singletons. Testicular cancer, particularly seminoma, was increased among same-sex twins (1.54) and all twins to an SIR of 1.38. Among other tumors, neurinomas and nonthyroid endocrine gland tumors were increased. Colorectal cancers and leukemia were decreased among all twins. Melanoma and squamous cell skin cancer were decreased in male same-sex twins. The data on this unselected population of twins suggest that twinning per se is not a risk factor of cancer. In utero hormonal exposures or postnatal growth stimulation may be related to the risk of testicular cancer and pituitary tumors. Protective effects against colorectal cancer may be related to a beneficial diet, and in melanoma and skin cancer, to socioeconomic factors. The study involved multiple comparisons, and internal consistency between the results was one of the main factors considered for their plausibility. The results should encourage others working on twin and singleton populations to examine the specific associations and emerging hypotheses.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
