Evidence Hub

Genetic risk, incident gastric cancer, and healthy lifestyle: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies and prospective cohort study

G. Jin, J. Lv, Ming Yang, Meng-Yun Wang, Meng Zhu, Tianpei Wang, Cai-Wang Yan, Can-Qing Yu et al.

The Lancet Oncology, 2020

168 participants · 206 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Genetic variants and lifestyle factors have been associated with gastric cancer risk, but the extent to which an increased genetic risk can be offset by a healthy lifestyle remains unknown. We aimed to establish a genetic risk model for gastric cancer and assess the benefits of adhering to a healthy lifestyle in individuals with a high genetic risk.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis and prospective cohort study, we first did a fixed-effects meta-analysis of the association between genetic variants and gastric cancer in six independent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) with a case-control study design. These GWAS comprised 21 168 Han Chinese individuals, of whom 10 254 had gastric cancer and 10 914 geographically matched controls did not. Using summary statistics from the meta-analysis, we constructed five polygenic risk scores in a range of thresholds (p=5 × 10-4 p=5 × 10-5 p=5 × 10-6 p=5 × 10-7, and p=5 × 10-8) for gastric cancer. We then applied these scores to an independent, prospective, nationwide cohort of 100 220 individuals from the China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB), with more than 10 years of follow-up. The relative and absolute risk of incident gastric cancer associated with healthy lifestyle factors (defined as not smoking, never consuming alcohol, the low consumption of preserved foods, and the frequent intake of fresh fruits and vegetables), was assessed and stratified by genetic risk (low [quintile 1 of the polygenic risk score], intermediate [quintile…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 168 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free