RESUMEN
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and has a strong heritable basis. We report a genome-wide association analysis of 34,627 CRC cases and 71,379 controls of European ancestry that identifies SNPs at 31 new CRC risk loci. We also identify eight independent risk SNPs at the new and previously reported European CRC loci, and a further nine CRC SNPs at loci previously only identified in Asian populations. We use in situ promoter capture Hi-C (CHi-C), gene expression, and in silico annotation methods to identify likely target genes of CRC SNPs. Whilst these new SNP associations implicate target genes that are enriched for known CRC pathways such as Wnt and BMP, they also highlight novel pathways with no prior links to colorectal tumourigenesis. These findings provide further insight into CRC susceptibility and enhance the prospects of applying genetic risk scores to personalised screening and prevention.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/genética , Sitios Genéticos , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Pueblo Asiatico/genética , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Conjuntos de Datos como Asunto , Femenino , Estudio de Asociación del Genoma Completo , Humanos , Patrón de Herencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple , Factores de Riesgo , Población Blanca/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Constitutional loss of function (LOF) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in pattern recognition receptors FPR1, TLR3, and TLR4 have previously been reported to predict oxaliplatin benefit in colorectal cancer. Confirmation of this association could substantially improve patient stratification. METHODS: We performed a retrospective biomarker analysis of the Short Course in Oncology Therapy (SCOT) and COIN/COIN-B trials. Participant status for LOF variants in FPR1 (rs867228), TLR3 (rs3775291), and TLR4 (rs4986790/rs4986791) was determined by genotyping array or genotype imputation. Associations between LOF variants and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox regression, adjusted for confounders, using additive, dominant, and recessive genetic models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Our validation study populations included 2929 and 1948 patients in the SCOT and COIN/COIN-B cohorts, respectively, of whom 2728 and 1672 patients had functional status of all three SNPs determined. We found no evidence of an association between any SNP and DFS in the SCOT cohort, or with OS in either cohort, irrespective of the type of model used. This included models for which an association was previously reported for rs867228 (recessive model, multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for DFS in SCOT = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99 to 1.45, P = .07; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.63 to 1.34, P = .66), and rs4986790 (dominant model, multivariable-adjusted HR for DFS in SCOT = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.13, P = .27; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.31, P = .40). CONCLUSION: In this prespecified analysis of two large clinical trials, we found no evidence that constitutional LOF SNPs in FPR1, TLR3, or TLR4 are associated with differential benefit from oxaliplatin. Our results suggest these SNPs are unlikely to be clinically useful biomarkers.