Lori C. Sakoda

Dr. Lori C. Sakoda

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
4 September 2020 in Nature Communications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SRSara R. Rashkin
Sara R. Rashkin
RGRebecca Graff
Rebecca Graff
LKLinda Kachuri
Linda Kachuri
KTKhanh K. Thai
Khanh K. Thai
SAStacey E. Alexeeff
Stacey E. Alexeeff
JWJohn S. Witte
John S. Witte
Deciphering the shared genetic basis of distinct cancers has the potential to elucidate carcinogenic mechanisms and inform broadly applicable risk assessment efforts. Here, we undertake genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and comprehensive evaluations of heritability and pleiotropy across 18 cancer types in two large, population-based cohorts: the UK Biobank (408,786 European ancestry individuals; 48,961 cancer cases) and the Kaiser Permanente Genetic Epidemiology Research on Adult Health and Aging cohorts (66,526 European ancestry individuals; 16,001 cancer cases). The GWAS detect 21 genome-wide significant associations independent of previously reported results. Investigations of pleiotropy identify 12 cancer pairs exhibiting either positive or negative genetic correlations; 25 pleiotropic loci; and 100 independent pleiotropic variants, many of which are regulatory elements and/or influence cross-tissue gene expression. Our findings demonstrate widespread pleiotropy and offer further insight into the complex genetic architecture of cross-cancer susceptibility.

20 December 2022 in Nature Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Ceres Fernández-RozadillaCeres Fernández-Rozadilla
Ceres Fernández-Rozadilla
MTMaria Timofeeva
Maria Timofeeva
ZCZhishan Chen
Zhishan Chen
PLPhilip Law
Philip Law
MTMinta Thomas
Minta Thomas
UPUlrike Peters
Ulrike Peters

1 October 2020 in American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MRM. Patricia Rivera
M. Patricia Rivera
HKHormuzd A. Katki
Hormuzd A. Katki
NTNichole T. Tanner
Nichole T. Tanner
MTMatthew Triplette
Matthew Triplette
LSLori C. Sakoda
Lori C. Sakoda
MAMelinda C. Aldrich
Melinda C. Aldrich
Background: There are well-documented disparities in lung cancer outcomes across populations. Lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to reduce lung cancer mortality, but for this benefit to be realized by all high-risk groups, there must be careful attention to ensuring equitable access to this lifesaving preventive health measure. Objectives: To outline current knowledge on disparities in eligibility criteria for, access to, and implementation of LCS, and to develop an official American Thoracic Society statement to propose strategies to optimize current screening guidelines and resource allocation for equitable LCS implementation and dissemination. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in LCS, implementation science, primary care, pulmonology, health behavior, smoking cessation, epidemiology, and disparities research was convened. Participants reviewed available literature on historical disparities in cancer screening and emerging evidence of disparities in LCS. Results: Existing LCS guidelines do not consider racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and sex-based differences in smoking behaviors or lung cancer risk. Multiple barriers, including access to screening and cost, further contribute to the inequities in implementation and dissemination of LCS. Conclusions: This statement identifies the impact of LCS eligibility criteria on vulnerable populations who are at increased risk of lung cancer but do not meet eligibility criteria for screening, as well as multiple barriers that contribute to disparities in LCS implementation. Strategies to improve the selection and dissemination of LCS in vulnerable groups are described.

1 April 2020 in Gastroenterology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AAAlexi N. Archambault
Alexi N. Archambault
YSYu-Ru Su
Yu-Ru Su
JJJihyoun Jeon
Jihyoun Jeon
MTMinta Thomas
Minta Thomas
YLYi Lin
Yi Lin
RHRichard B. Hayes
Richard B. Hayes

1 August 2022 in Nature Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JBJinyoung Byun
Jinyoung Byun
YHYounghun Han
Younghun Han
YLYafang Li
Yafang Li
JXJun Xia
Jun Xia
ELErping Long
Erping Long
CAChristopher I. Amos
Christopher I. Amos

1 April 2021 in JAMA Network Open
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LSLori C. Sakoda
Lori C. Sakoda
MRM. Patricia Rivera
M. Patricia Rivera
JZJie Zhang
Jie Zhang
PPPasangi Perera
Pasangi Perera
CLCecile A. Laurent
Cecile A. Laurent
LHLouise M. Henderson
Louise M. Henderson
Landmark results from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) support recommendations for lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in the United States.1-3 The NLST demonstrated that annual screening of high-risk adults with LDCT (vs chest radiography) led to a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality.4 The Dutch-Belgian NELSON (Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek) trial subsequently showed a mortality benefit from LDCT screening,5 substantiating LCS as an effective strategy to reduce the high mortality rate of lung cancer worldwide. Since the publication of the 2013 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recommendations, which endorse annual LDCT screening of adults aged 55 to 77 years or 80 years with a smoking history of 30 or more pack-years and less than 15 years since quitting, the uptake of LCS has been increasing nationally.6-9 However, for LCS to achieve similar long-term effectiveness in real-world practice, successful completion of multiple steps, including individuals returning for annual LDCT screening, is vital.10