Genetic Variation in DNA Repair Pathways and Risk of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Molecular and genetic evidence suggests that DNA repair pathways may contribute to lymphoma susceptibility. Several studies have examined the association of DNA repair genes with lymphoma risk, but the findings from these reports have been inconsistent. Here we provide the results of a focused analysis of genetic variation in DNA repair genes and their association with the risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). With a population of 1,297 NHL cases and 1,946 controls, we have performed a two-stage case/control association analysis of 446 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) tagging the genetic variation in 81 DNA repair genes. We found the most significant association with NHL risk in the ATM locus for rs227060 (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.13–1.43, p = 6.77×10−5), which remained significant after adjustment for multiple testing. In a subtype-specific analysis, associations were also observed for the ATM locus among both diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) and small lymphocytic lymphomas (SLL), however there was no association observed among follicular lymphomas (FL). In addition, our study provides suggestive evidence of an interaction between SNPs in MRE11A and NBS1 associated with NHL risk (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34–0.77, p = 0.0002). Finally, an imputation analysis using the 1,000 Genomes Project data combined with a functional prediction analysis revealed the presence of biologically relevant variants that correlate with the observed association signals. While the findings generated here warrant independent validation, the results of our large study suggest that ATM may be a novel locus associated with the risk of multiple subtypes of NHL

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Susceptibility Loci Associated with Specific and Shared Subtypes of Lymphoid Malignancies

<div><p>The genetics of lymphoma susceptibility reflect the marked heterogeneity of diseases that comprise this broad phenotype. However, multiple subtypes of lymphoma are observed in some families, suggesting shared pathways of genetic predisposition to these pathologically distinct entities. Using a two-stage GWAS, we tested 530,583 SNPs in 944 cases of lymphoma, including 282 familial cases, and 4,044 public shared controls, followed by genotyping of 50 SNPs in 1,245 cases and 2,596 controls. A novel region on 11q12.1 showed association with combined lymphoma (LYM) subtypes. SNPs in this region included rs12289961 near <em>LPXN</em>, (P_LYM = 3.89×10⁻⁸, OR = 1.29) and rs948562 (P_LYM = 5.85×10⁻⁷, OR = 1.29). A SNP in a novel non-HLA region on 6p23 (rs707824, P_NHL = 5.72×10⁻⁷) was suggestive of an association conferring susceptibility to lymphoma. Four SNPs, all in a previously reported HLA region, 6p21.32, showed genome-wide significant associations with follicular lymphoma. The most significant association with follicular lymphoma was for rs4530903 (P_FL = 2.69×10⁻¹², OR = 1.93). Three novel SNPs near the HLA locus, rs9268853, rs2647046, and rs2621416, demonstrated additional variation contributing toward genetic susceptibility to FL associated with this region. Genes implicated by GWAS were also found to be cis-eQTLs in lymphoblastoid cell lines; candidate genes in these regions have been implicated in hematopoiesis and immune function. These results, showing novel susceptibility regions and allelic heterogeneity, point to the existence of pathways of susceptibility to both shared as well as specific subtypes of lymphoid malignancy.</p> </div

Association analysis of genetic variants in DNA repair genes with the risk of major NHL subtypes.

<p>DLBCL = diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; FL = follicular lymphoma; SLL/CLL = small lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphocytic leukemia; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval.</p

The results of association analysis, displayed as Manhattan plot, after imputation of 28 SNPs genotyped in both stage 1 and 2, which tag 11 DNA repair genes that showed association with NHL risk in our study.

<p>The SNPs and genes are ordered by chromosomal position (x-axis). The associations are displayed as –log₁₀(p-value) for each SNP. Red dots represent fifteen tagging SNPs that were genotyped in our study and were associated with NHL risk. Green dots represent tagging SNPs that were genotyped in our study and that showed no association with NHL. Blue markers represent SNPs imputed by IMPUTE from 1KG. The red dotted line defines the threshold of p-value <0.05. * indicates an associated SNP with a putatively functional impact; non-synonymous coding change or SNP mapping in: transcription factor binding site, H3K4Me1 chromatin mark, DNaseI hypersensitivity cluster, 5′UTR, 3′UTR.</p

Association analysis of rs1805812 x rs625245 interactions between <i>MRE11A</i> and <i>NBS1</i> with the risk of NHL.

<p>OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval.</p

Association analysis of genetic variants in DNA repair genes with the risk of NHL.

<p>OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval.</p