Association of genetic ancestry with colorectal tumor location in Puerto Rican Latinos.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the first cause of cancer deaths among Puerto Ricans. The incidence and mortality of CRC in Puerto Rico continue to be on the rise. The burden of CRC in Puerto Rico is higher than among US Hispanics and is second only to African Americans, thus supporting the importance of studying this CRC health disparity. The genetic background of the Puerto Rican population is a mix of European, African, and Amerindian races, which may account, in part, for the differences observed in the CRC mortality rates among Puerto Ricans. The objective of the study was to assess the role of genetic ancestry in CRC risk and its association with clinicopathological features of CRC tumors in Puerto Ricans. RESULTS: We used a validated panel of 105 ancestry informative markers (AIMs) to estimate genetic ancestry in 406 Puerto Rican CRC cases and 425 Puerto Rican controls. We examined the association of genetic ancestry with CRC risk and tumor clinicopathological characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The mean ancestry proportions in the study population were 61% European, 21% African, and 18% Amerindian. No association was observed between genetic ancestry and risk of CRC. However, African ancestry was associated with an increased risk of developing rectal tumors (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.04-2.31). Additional studies are needed to fully elucidate the role of African ancestry in CRC carcinogenesis.

Genetic ancestry and prostate cancer susceptibility SNPs in Puerto Rican and African American men.

BACKGROUND: The Puerto Rican (PR) population is a racially admixed population that has a high prostate cancer (PCa) mortality rate. We hypothesized in this pilot study that West African Ancestry (WAA) was associated with PCa in this heterogeneous (PR) population. METHODS: A case/case and case/control study was performed. Controls, 207 African American (AA) and 133 PR were defined as men with no PCa, a serum PSA < 2.5 ng/mL and a negative rectal examination. Cases were patients with pathological specimens from radical prostatectomies (RP) (291 PR and 200 AA). DNA was extracted from whole blood of controls and from paraffin embedded normal seminal vesicle from the RPs. We assessed the association of PCa and aggressiveness with genetic ancestry using an ancestry informative marker panel (AIMs) and Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the association of PCa and aggressiveness with 15 previously PCa associated SNPs using Chi square test. Gleason Score (GS) and tumor stage (TS) were used to define low risk (GS ≤ 7[3 + 4]), TS ≤ pT2) and high risk (GS≥ 7[4 + 3], TS > pT2) PCa. Statistical analyses were done using SAS. RESULTS: No difference in overall percent WAA was found between PR cases and controls. Among PR or AA cases WAA was not associated with disease severity based upon risk group, Gleason score or stage. Among AA controls WAA was significantly higher than in cases. The SNP rs7824364 (chromosome 8q24) PCa risk allele was significantly increased among cases versus controls for both AA (P < 0.0001) and PR (P = 0.0001) men. PR men with ≥1 risk allele exhibited a higher percent of WAA (39% vs 29%, P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: The SNP rs7824364, a local marker of WAA in the 8q24 region was associated with PCa among both AA and PR men and with increased WAA among PR men. This novel relationship of PCA risk loci, WAA with PCa and its phenotype among PR men deserves further study.