The heritability of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cannot be fully explained by recognized genetic risk factors identified as achieving genome-wide significance. In addition, the combined contribution of genetic variation to COPD risk has not been fully explored. We sought to determine: (1) whether studies of variants from previous studies of COPD or lung function in a larger sample could identify additional associated variants, particularly for severe COPD; and (2) the impact of genetic risk scores on COPD. We genotyped 3,346 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 2,588 cases (1,803 severe COPD) and 1,782 control subjects from four cohorts, and performed association testing with COPD, combining these results with existing genotyping data from 6,633 cases (3,497 severe COPD) and 5,704 control subjects. In addition, we developed genetic risk scores from SNPs associated with lung function and COPD and tested their discriminatory power for COPD-related measures. We identified significant associations between SNPs near PPIC (P = 1.28 × 10^-8) and PPP4R4/SERPINA1 (P = 1.01 × 10^-8) and severe COPD; the latter association may be driven by recognized variants in SERPINA1. Genetic risk scores based on SNPs previously associated with COPD and lung function had a modest ability to discriminate COPD (area under the curve, ∼0.6), and accounted for a mean 0.9-1.9% lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second percent predicted for each additional risk allele. In a large genetic association analysis, we identified associations with severe COPD near PPIC and SERPINA1. A risk score based on combining genetic variants had modest, but significant, effects on risk of COPD and lung function.

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.