The Role of Cyclooxygenase-1 and -2 in Sevoflurane-Induced Postconditioning Against Myocardial Infarction

Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 mediates ischemic pre- and postconditioning as well as anesthetic-induced preconditioning. However, the role of COX-1 and -2 in anesthetic-induced postconditioning has not been investigated. We evaluated the role of COX-1 and -2 in sevoflurane-induced postconditioning in vivo. Pentobarbital-anaesthetized male C57BL/6 mice were subjected to 45 minutes of coronary artery occlusion and 3 hours of reperfusion. Animals received either no intervention, the vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, 10 µL/g intraperitoneally), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, 5 µg/g intraperitoneally), the selective COX-1 inhibitor SC-560 (10 µg/g intraperitoneally), or the selective COX-2 inhibitor NS-398 (5 µg/g intraperitoneally). 1.0 MAC (minimum alveolar concentration) sevoflurane was administered for 18 minutes during early reperfusion either alone or in combination with ASA, SC-560, and NS-398. Infarct size was determined with triphenyltetrazolium chloride. Statistical analysis was performed using 1-way and 2-way analyses of variance with post hoc Duncan testing. The infarct size in the control group was 44% ± 9%. DMSO (42% ± 7%), ASA (36% ± 6%), and NS-398 (44% ± 18%) had no effect on infarct size. Sevoflurane (17% ± 4%; P < .05) and SC-560 (26% ± 10%; P < .05) significantly reduced the infarct size compared with control condition. Sevoflurane-induced postconditioning was not abolished by ASA (16% ± 5%) and SC-560 (22% ± 4%). NS-398 abolished sevoflurane-induced postconditioning (33% ± 14%). It was concluded that sevoflurane induces postconditioning in mice. Inhibition of COX-1 elicits a myocardial infarct size reduction and does not abolish sevoflurane-induced postconditioning. Blockade of COX-2 abolishes sevoflurane-induced postconditioning. These results indicate that sevoflurane-induced postconditioning is mediated by COX-2

Health outcomes in offspring born to survivors of childhood cancers following assisted reproductive technologies

Purpose: An increasing number of childhood cancer survivors are using assisted reproductive technologies (ART) to overcome treatment-related fertility impairment. We report perinatal and health outcomes of offspring born to survivors following ART. Methods: The FeCt Multicenter Offspring Study surveyed the health of offspring of childhood cancer survivors. Health outcomes in offspring born to survivors following ART (n = 57, 4.6%) or after spontaneous conception (n = 1182) were assessed in the German cohort (n = 1239) using bivariate analysis. Findings were put into the context of the general German population by health outcome assessment in 1:1 matched-pair analysis (n = 2478). Results: Nearly twice the survivors used ART compared with numbers reported for the German general population (4.6% vs. 2.6%). Successful pregnancies were achieved after a median of two cycles, mainly using non-cryopreserved oocytes/sperm. Multiple sibling births (p < 0.001, 28.1% vs. 3.0%) and low birth weight (p = 0.008; OR = 2.659, 95% CI = 1.258-5.621) occurred significantly more often in offspring born to survivors who utilized ART than spontaneously conceived children, whereas similar percentages were born preterm or too small for their gestational age. ART did not increase the prevalence of childhood cancer or congenital malformations in offspring born to survivors. Conclusion: ART use by childhood cancer survivors was successful with both fresh and cryopreserved oocytes/sperm, and did not influence perinatal health or health outcomes when known confounders were taken into account. Implications for cancer survivors: Oncofertility is an important component of patient care. Our study implicates that the utilization of ART by adult survivors of childhood cancer does not put offspring at additional risk for adverse perinatal or health outcomes

The Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology by European Childhood Cancer Survivors

CCS often wish to have biological children yet harbour concerns about fertility impairment, pregnancy risks and the general health risks of prospective offspring. To clarify these concerns, health outcomes in survivor offspring born following ART (n = 74, 4.5%) or after spontaneous conception (n = 1585) were assessed in our European offspring study by descriptive and bivariate analysis. Outcomes were compared to a sibling offspring cohort (n = 387) in a 4:1 matched-pair analysis (n = 1681). (i) Survivors were more likely to employ ART than their siblings (4.5% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.501). Successful pregnancies were achieved after a median of one cycle with, most commonly, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using non-cryopreserved oocytes/sperm. (ii) Multiple-sibling births (p < 0.001, 29.7% vs. 2.5%), low birth weight (p < 0.001; OR = 3.035, 95%-CI = 1.615-5.706), and preterm birth (p < 0.001; OR = 2.499, 95%-CI = 1.401-4.459) occurred significantly more often in survivor offspring following ART utilisation than in spontaneously conceived children. ART did not increase the prevalence of childhood cancer, congenital malformations or heart defects. (iii) These outcomes had similar prevalences in the sibling population. In our explorative study, we could not detect an influence on health outcomes when known confounders, such as multiple births, were taken into account

Health outcomes in offspring born to survivors of childhood cancers following assisted reproductive technologies

Abstract Purpose An increasing number of childhood cancer survivors are using assisted reproductive technologies (ART) to overcome treatment-related fertility impairment. We report perinatal and health outcomes of offspring born to survivors following ART. Methods The FeCt Multicenter Offspring Study surveyed the health of offspring of childhood cancer survivors. Health outcomes in offspring born to survivors following ART (n = 57, 4.6%) or after spontaneous conception (n = 1182) were assessed in the German cohort (n = 1239) using bivariate analysis. Findings were put into the context of the general German population by health outcome assessment in 1:1 matched-pair analysis (n = 2478). Results Nearly twice the survivors used ART compared with numbers reported for the German general population (4.6% vs. 2.6%). Successful pregnancies were achieved after a median of two cycles, mainly using non-cryopreserved oocytes/sperm. Multiple sibling births (p < 0.001, 28.1% vs. 3.0%) and low birth weight (p = 0.008; OR = 2.659, 95% CI = 1.258–5.621) occurred significantly more often in offspring born to survivors who utilized ART than spontaneously conceived children, whereas similar percentages were born preterm or too small for their gestational age. ART did not increase the prevalence of childhood cancer or congenital malformations in offspring born to survivors. Conclusion ART use by childhood cancer survivors was successful with both fresh and cryopreserved oocytes/sperm, and did not influence perinatal health or health outcomes when known confounders were taken into account. Implications for Cancer Survivors Oncofertility is an important component of patient care. Our study implicates that the utilization of ART by adult survivors of childhood cancer does not put offspring at additional risk for adverse perinatal or health outcomes

Induction of Tachykinin Production in Airway Epithelia in Response to Viral Infection

The tachykinins are implicated in neurogenic inflammation and the neuropeptide substance P in particular has been shown to be a proinflammatory mediator. A role for the tachykinins in host response to lung challenge has been previously demonstrated but has been focused predominantly on the release of the tachykinins from nerves innervating the lung. We have previously demonstrated the most dramatic phenotype described for the substance P encoding gene preprotachykinin-A (PPT-A) to date in controlling the host immune response to the murine gammaherpesvirus 68, in the lung.In this study we have utilised transgenic mice engineered to co-ordinately express the beta-galactosidase marker gene along with PPT-A to facilitate the tracking of PPT-A expression. Using a combination of these mice and conventional immunohistology we now demonstrate that PPT-A gene expression and substance P peptide are induced in cells of the respiratory tract including tracheal, bronchiolar and alveolar epithelial cells and macrophages after viral infection. This induction was observed 24h post infection, prior to observable inflammation and the expression of pro-inflammatory chemokines in this model. Induced expression of the PPT-A gene and peptide persisted in the lower respiratory tract through day 7 post infection.Non-neuronal PPT-A expression early after infection may have important clinical implications for the progression or management of lung disease or infection aside from the well characterised later involvement of the tachykinins during the inflammatory response

The Rest-Frame Optical Luminosity Function of Cluster Galaxies at z<0.8 and the Assembly of the Cluster Red Sequence

We present the rest-frame optical luminosity function (LF) of red sequence galaxies in 16 clusters at 0.4<z<0.8 drawn from the ESO Distant Cluster Survey (EDisCS). We compare our clusters to an analogous sample from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and match the EDisCS clusters to their most likely descendants. We measure all LFs down to M M* + (2.5 - 3.5). At z<0.8, the bright end of the LF is consistent with passive evolution but there is a significant build-up of the faint end of the red sequence towards lower redshift. There is a weak dependence of the LF on cluster velocity dispersion for EDisCS but no such dependence for the SDSS clusters. We find tentative evidence that red sequence galaxies brighter than a threshold magnitude are already in place, and that this threshold evolves to fainter magnitudes toward lower redshifts. We compare the EDisCS LFs with the LF of co-eval red sequence galaxies in the field and find that the bright end of the LFs agree. However, relative to the number of bright red galaxies, the field has more faint red galaxies than clusters at 0.6<z<0.8 but fewer at 0.4<z<0.6, implying differential evolution. We compare the total light in the EDisCS cluster red sequences to the total red sequence light in our SDSS cluster sample. Clusters at 0.4<z<0.8 must increase their luminosity on the red sequence (and therefore stellar mass in red galaxies) by a factor of 1-3 by z=0. The necessary processes that add mass to the red sequence in clusters predict local clusters that are over-luminous as compared to those observed in the SDSS. The predicted cluster luminosities can be reconciled with observed local cluster luminosities by combining multiple previously known effects.Comment: Accepted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal. 36 pages, 16 figures, 10 table

The UGT1A6_19_GG genotype is a breast cancer risk factor

Validation of an association between the UGT1A6_19_T>G (rs6759892) polymorphism and overall breast cancer risk. A pilot study included two population-based case-control studies from Germany (MARIE-GENICA). An independent validation study comprised four independent breast cancer case-control studies from Finland (KBCP, OBCS), Germany (BBCC), and Sweden (SASBAC). The pooled analysis included 7418 cases and 8720 controls from all six studies. Participants were of European descent. Genotyping was done by MALDI-TOF MS and statistical analysis was performed by logistic regression adjusted for age and study. The increased overall breast cancer risk for women with the UGT1A6_19_GG genotype which was observed in the pilot study was confirmed in the set of four independent study collections (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.05–1.22; p = 0.001). The pooled study showed a similar effect (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04–1.14; p = 0.001). The risk effect on the basis of allele frequencies was highly significant, the pooled analysis showed an OR of 1.11 (95% CI 1.06–1.16; p = 5.8 × 10−6). We confirmed the association of UGT1A6_19_GG with increased overall breast cancer risk and conclude that our result from a well powered multi-stage study adds a novel candidate to the panel of validated breast cancer susceptibility loci

Common non-synonymous SNPs associated with breast cancer susceptibility: findings from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium.

Candidate variant association studies have been largely unsuccessful in identifying common breast cancer susceptibility variants, although most studies have been underpowered to detect associations of a realistic magnitude. We assessed 41 common non-synonymous single-nucleotide polymorphisms (nsSNPs) for which evidence of association with breast cancer risk had been previously reported. Case-control data were combined from 38 studies of white European women (46 450 cases and 42 600 controls) and analyzed using unconditional logistic regression. Strong evidence of association was observed for three nsSNPs: ATXN7-K264R at 3p21 [rs1053338, per allele OR = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04-1.10, P = 2.9 × 10(-6)], AKAP9-M463I at 7q21 (rs6964587, OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.03-1.07, P = 1.7 × 10(-6)) and NEK10-L513S at 3p24 (rs10510592, OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.07-1.12, P = 5.1 × 10(-17)). The first two associations reached genome-wide statistical significance in a combined analysis of available data, including independent data from nine genome-wide association studies (GWASs): for ATXN7-K264R, OR = 1.07 (95% CI = 1.05-1.10, P = 1.0 × 10(-8)); for AKAP9-M463I, OR = 1.05 (95% CI = 1.04-1.07, P = 2.0 × 10(-10)). Further analysis of other common variants in these two regions suggested that intronic SNPs nearby are more strongly associated with disease risk. We have thus identified a novel susceptibility locus at 3p21, and confirmed previous suggestive evidence that rs6964587 at 7q21 is associated with risk. The third locus, rs10510592, is located in an established breast cancer susceptibility region; the association was substantially attenuated after adjustment for the known GWAS hit. Thus, each of the associated nsSNPs is likely to be a marker for another, non-coding, variant causally related to breast cancer risk. Further fine-mapping and functional studies are required to identify the underlying risk-modifying variants and the genes through which they act.BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A12014) and by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n8 223175 (HEALTH-F2–2009-223175) (COGS). Meetings of the BCAC have been funded by the European Union COST programme (BM0606). Genotyping of the iCOGS array was funded by the European Union (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10710), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the ‘CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer’ program and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade of Quebec (PSR-SIIRI-701). Additional support for the iCOGS infrastructure was provided by the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112—the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The ABCFS and OFBCR work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement t by the US Government or the BCFR. The ABCFS was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia) and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. J.L.H. is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Principal Research Fellow and M.C.S. is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. The OFBCR work was also supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research ‘CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer’ program. The ABCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society Grant no. NKI2007-3839 and NKI2009-4363. The ACP study is funded by the Breast Cancer Research Trust, UK. The work of the BBCC was partly funded by ELAN-Programme of the University Hospital of Erlangen. The BBCS is funded by Cancer Research UK and Breakthrough Breast Cancer and acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, and the National Cancer Research Network (NCRN). E.S. is supported by NIHR Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, Guy’s & St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London, UK. Core funding to the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics was provided by the Wellcome Trust (090532/Z/09/Z). I.T. is supported by the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. The BSUCH study was supported by the Dietmar-Hopp Foundation, the Helmholtz Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). The CECILE study was funded by the Fondation de France, the French National Institute of Cancer (INCa), The National League against Cancer, the National Agency for Environmental l and Occupational Health and Food Safety (ANSES), the National Agency for Research (ANR), and the Association for Research against Cancer (ARC). The CGPS was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev Hospital.The CNIO-BCS was supported by the Genome Spain Foundation the Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cáncer and grants from the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer and the Fondo de Investigación Sanitario PI11/00923 and PI081120). The Human Genotyping-CEGEN Unit, CNIO is supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III. D.A. was supported by a Fellowship from the Michael Manzella Foundation (MMF) and was a participant in the CNIO Summer Training Program. The CTS was initially supported by the California Breast Cancer Act of 1993 and the California Breast Cancer Research Fund (contract 97-10500) and is currently funded through the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA77398). Collection of cancer incidence e data was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885. HAC receives support from the Lon V Smith Foundation (LVS39420). The ESTHER study was supported by a grant from the Baden Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts. Additional cases were recruited in the context of the VERDI study, which was supported by a grant from the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe). The GENICA was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany grants 01KW9975/5, 01KW9976/8, 01KW9977/0 and 01KW0114, the Robert Bosch Foundation, Stuttgart, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), as well as the Department of Internal Medicine , Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Johanniter Krankenhaus Bonn, Germany. The HEBCS was supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (132473), the Finnish Cancer Society, The Nordic Cancer Union and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. The HERPACC was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, Culture and Technology of Japan, by a Grant-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive 10-Year strategy for Cancer Control from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, by a research grant from Takeda Science Foundation , by Health and Labour Sciences Research Grants for Research on Applying Health Technology from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and by National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund. The HMBCS was supported by short-term fellowships from the German Academic Exchange Program (to N.B), and the Friends of Hannover Medical School (to N.B.). Financial support for KARBAC was provided through the regional agreement on medical training and clinical research (ALF) between Stockholm County Council and Karolinska Institutet, the Stockholm Cancer Foundation and the Swedish Cancer Society. The KBCP was financially supported by the special Government Funding (EVO) of Kuopio University Hospital grants, Cancer Fund of North Savo, the Finnish Cancer Organizations, the Academy of Finland and by the strategic funding of the University of Eastern Finland. kConFab is supported by grants from the National Breast Cancer Foundation , the NHMRC, the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. The kConFab Clinical Follow Up Study was funded by the NHMRC (145684, 288704, 454508). Financial support for the AOCS was provided by the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (DAMD17-01-1-0729), the Cancer Council of Tasmania and Cancer Foundation of Western Australia and the NHMRC (199600). G.C.T. and P.W. are supported by the NHMRC. LAABC is supported by grants (1RB-0287, 3PB-0102, 5PB-0018 and 10PB-0098) from the California Breast Cancer Research Program. Incident breast cancer cases were collected by the USC Cancer Surveillance Program (CSP) which is supported under subcontract by the California Department of Health. The CSP is also part of the National Cancer Institute’s Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, under contract number N01CN25403. LMBC is supported by the ‘Stichting tegen Kanker’ (232-2008 and 196-2010). The MARIE study was supported by the Deutsche Krebshilfe e.V. (70-2892-BR I), the Federal Ministry of Education Research (BMBF) Germany (01KH0402), the Hamburg Cancer Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). MBCSG is supported by grants from the Italian Association ciation for Cancer Research (AIRC) and by funds from the Italian citizens who allocated a 5/1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects ‘5 × 1000’). The MCBCS was supported by the NIH grants (CA122340, CA128978) and a Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation. MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 209057, 251553 and 504711 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. The MEC was supported by NIH grants CA63464, CA54281, CA098758 and CA132839. The work of MTLGEBCS was supported by the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant CRN-87521) and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade (grant PSR-SIIRI-701). MYBRCA is funded by research grants from the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation (CARIF). Additional controls were recruited by the Singapore Eye Research Institute, which was supported by a grant from the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC08/1/35/19,tel:08/1/35/19./550), Singapore and the National medical Research Council, Singapore (NMRC/CG/SERI/2010). The NBCS was supported by grants from the Norwegian Research council (155218/V40, 175240/S10 to A.L.B.D., FUGE-NFR 181600/ V11 to V.N.K. and a Swizz Bridge Award to A.L.B.D.). The NBHS was supported by NIH grant R01CA100374. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The OBCS was supported by research grants from the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, the Academy of Finland, the University of Oulu, and the Oulu University Hospital. The ORIGO study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (RUL 1997-1505) and the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-NLCP16). The PBCS was funded by Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. pKARMA is a combination of the KARMA and LIBRO-1 studies. KARMA was supported by Ma¨rit and Hans Rausings Initiative Against Breast Cancer. KARMA and LIBRO-1 were supported the Cancer Risk Prediction Center (CRisP; www.crispcenter.org), a Linnaeus Centre (Contract ID 70867902) financed by the Swedish Research Council. The RBCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society (DDHK 2004-3124, DDHK 2009-4318). SASBAC was supported by funding from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A∗STAR), the US National Institute of Health (NIH) and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation KC was financed by the Swedish Cancer Society (5128-B07-01PAF). The SBCGS was supported primarily by NIH grants R01CA64277, R01CA148667, and R37CA70867. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The SBCS was supported by Yorkshire Cancer Research S305PA, S299 and S295. Funding for the SCCS was provided by NIH grant R01 CA092447. The Arkansas Central Cancer Registry is fully funded by a grant from National Program of Cancer Registries, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Data on SCCS cancer cases from Mississippi were collected by the Mississippi Cancer Registry which participates in the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the CDC or the Mississippi Cancer Registry. SEARCH is funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK (C490/A10124) and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge. The SEBCS was supported by the BRL (Basic Research Laboratory) program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2012-0000347). SGBCC is funded by the National Medical Research Council Start-up Grant and Centre Grant (NMRC/CG/NCIS /2010). The recruitment of controls by the Singapore Consortium of Cohort Studies-Multi-ethnic cohort (SCCS-MEC) was funded by the Biomedical Research Council (grant number: 05/1/21/19/425). SKKDKFZS is supported by the DKFZ. The SZBCS was supported by Grant PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. K. J. is a fellow of International PhD program, Postgraduate School of Molecular Medicine, Warsaw Medical University, supported by the Polish Foundation of Science. The TNBCC was supported by the NIH grant (CA128978), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation , Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Stefanie Spielman Fund for Breast Cancer Research and a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation. Part of the TNBCC (DEMOKRITOS) has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek National Funds through the Operational Program ‘Education and Life-long Learning’ of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF)—Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research & Technology: ARISTEIA. The TWBCS is supported by the Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica and the National Science Council, Taiwan. The UKBGS is funded by Breakthrough Breast Cancer and the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR). ICR acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Funding to pay the Open Access publication charges for this article was provided by the Wellcome Trust.This is the advanced access published version distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0, which can also be viewed on the publisher's webstie at: http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/07/04/hmg.ddu311.full.pdf+htm

Fine-Scale Mapping of the 4q24 Locus Identifies Two Independent Loci Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

Background: A recent association study identified a common variant (rs9790517) at 4q24 to be associated with breast cancer risk. Independent association signals and potential functional variants in this locus have not been explored. Methods: We conducted a fine-mapping analysis in 55,540 breast cancer cases and 51,168 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results: Conditional analyses identified two independent association signals among women of European ancestry, represented by rs9790517 [conditional P = 2.51 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02–1.07] and rs77928427 (P = 1.86 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02–1.07). Functional annotation using data from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project revealed two putative functional variants, rs62331150 and rs73838678 in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with rs9790517 (r2 ≥ 0.90) residing in the active promoter or enhancer, respectively, of the nearest gene, TET2. Both variants are located in DNase I hypersensitivity and transcription factor–binding sites. Using data from both The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC), we showed that rs62331150 was associated with level of expression of TET2 in breast normal and tumor tissue. Conclusion: Our study identified two independent association signals at 4q24 in relation to breast cancer risk and suggested that observed association in this locus may be mediated through the regulation of TET2. Impact: Fine-mapping study with large sample size warranted for identification of independent loci for breast cancer risk