RESUMO
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have led to the identification of hundreds of susceptibility loci across cancers, but the impact of further studies remains uncertain. Here we analyse summary-level data from GWAS of European ancestry across fourteen cancer sites to estimate the number of common susceptibility variants (polygenicity) and underlying effect-size distribution. All cancers show a high degree of polygenicity, involving at a minimum of thousands of loci. We project that sample sizes required to explain 80% of GWAS heritability vary from 60,000 cases for testicular to over 1,000,000 cases for lung cancer. The maximum relative risk achievable for subjects at the 99th risk percentile of underlying polygenic risk scores (PRS), compared to average risk, ranges from 12 for testicular to 2.5 for ovarian cancer. We show that PRS have potential for risk stratification for cancers of breast, colon and prostate, but less so for others because of modest heritability and lower incidence.
Assuntos
Predisposição Genética para Doença , Modelos Genéticos , Herança Multifatorial , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Animais , Feminino , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Neoplasias/genética , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Medição de Risco/métodos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previous gene-environment interaction studies of breast cancer risk have provided sparse evidence of interactions. Using the largest available dataset to date, we performed a comprehensive assessment of potential effect modification of 205 common susceptibility variants by 13 established breast cancer risk factors, including replication of previously reported interactions. METHODS: Analyses were performed using 28 176 cases and 32 209 controls genotyped with iCOGS array and 44 109 cases and 48 145 controls genotyped using OncoArray from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). Gene-environment interactions were assessed using unconditional logistic regression and likelihood ratio tests for breast cancer risk overall and by estrogen-receptor (ER) status. Bayesian false discovery probability was used to assess the noteworthiness of the meta-analysed array-specific interactions. RESULTS: Noteworthy evidence of interaction at ≤1% prior probability was observed for three single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-risk factor pairs. SNP rs4442975 was associated with a greater reduction of risk of ER-positive breast cancer [odds ratio (OR)int = 0.85 (0.78-0.93), Pint = 2.8 x 10-4] and overall breast cancer [ORint = 0.85 (0.78-0.92), Pint = 7.4 x 10-5) in current users of estrogen-progesterone therapy compared with non-users. This finding was supported by replication using OncoArray data of the previously reported interaction between rs13387042 (r2 = 0.93 with rs4442975) and current estrogen-progesterone therapy for overall disease (Pint = 0.004). The two other interactions suggested stronger associations between SNP rs6596100 and ER-negative breast cancer with increasing parity and younger age at first birth. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study does not suggest strong effect modification of common breast cancer susceptibility variants by established risk factors.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Predisposição Genética para Doença/genética , Alelos , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Europa (Continente) , Fator XIII , Feminino , Interação Gene-Ambiente , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Genótipo , Humanos , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único/genética , Receptores de Estrogênio/genética , Fatores de Risco , População BrancaRESUMO
Excessive exposure to estrogen is a well-established risk factor for endometrial cancer (EC), particularly for cancers of endometrioid histology. The physiological function of estrogen is primarily mediated by estrogen receptor alpha, encoded by ESR1. Consequently, several studies have investigated whether variation at the ESR1 locus is associated with risk of EC, with conflicting results. We performed comprehensive fine-mapping analyses of 3633 genotyped and imputed single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 6607 EC cases and 37 925 controls. There was evidence of an EC risk signal located at a potential alternative promoter of the ESR1 gene (lead SNP rs79575945, P=1.86×10(-5)), which was stronger for cancers of endometrioid subtype (P=3.76×10(-6)). Bioinformatic analysis suggests that this risk signal is in a functionally important region targeting ESR1, and eQTL analysis found that rs79575945 was associated with expression of SYNE1, a neighbouring gene. In summary, we have identified a single EC risk signal located at ESR1, at study-wide significance. Given SNPs located at this locus have been associated with risk for breast cancer, also a hormonally driven cancer, this study adds weight to the rationale for performing informed candidate fine-scale genetic studies across cancer types.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Neoplasias do Endométrio/genética , Receptor alfa de Estrogênio/genética , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Proteínas do Tecido Nervoso/genética , Proteínas Nucleares/genética , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Biologia Computacional , Proteínas do Citoesqueleto , Bases de Dados Genéticas , Feminino , Loci Gênicos , Genótipo , Humanos , Metanálise como Assunto , Prognóstico , Regiões Promotoras Genéticas/genética , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Part of the substantial unexplained familial aggregation of breast cancer may be due to interactions between common variants, but few studies have had adequate statistical power to detect interactions of realistic magnitude. We aimed to assess all two-way interactions in breast cancer susceptibility between 70,917 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) selected primarily based on prior evidence of a marginal effect. Thirty-eight international studies contributed data for 46,450 breast cancer cases and 42,461 controls of European origin as part of a multi-consortium project (COGS). First, SNPs were preselected based on evidence (P < 0.01) of a per-allele main effect, and all two-way combinations of those were evaluated by a per-allele (1 d.f.) test for interaction using logistic regression. Second, all 2.5 billion possible two-SNP combinations were evaluated using Boolean operation-based screening and testing, and SNP pairs with the strongest evidence of interaction (P < 10(-4)) were selected for more careful assessment by logistic regression. Under the first approach, 3277 SNPs were preselected, but an evaluation of all possible two-SNP combinations (1 d.f.) identified no interactions at P < 10(-8). Results from the second analytic approach were consistent with those from the first (P > 10(-10)). In summary, we observed little evidence of two-way SNP interactions in breast cancer susceptibility, despite the large number of SNPs with potential marginal effects considered and the very large sample size. This finding may have important implications for risk prediction, simplifying the modelling required. Further comprehensive, large-scale genome-wide interaction studies may identify novel interacting loci if the inherent logistic and computational challenges can be overcome.