Meta-analysis of Genome Wide Association Studies Identifies Genetic Markers of Late Toxicity Following Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.

Nearly 50% of cancer patients undergo radiotherapy. Late radiotherapy toxicity affects quality-of-life in long-term cancer survivors and risk of side-effects in a minority limits doses prescribed to the majority of patients. Development of a test predicting risk of toxicity could benefit many cancer patients. We aimed to meta-analyze individual level data from four genome-wide association studies from prostate cancer radiotherapy cohorts including 1564 men to identify genetic markers of toxicity. Prospectively assessed two-year toxicity endpoints (urinary frequency, decreased urine stream, rectal bleeding, overall toxicity) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associations were tested using multivariable regression, adjusting for clinical and patient-related risk factors. A fixed-effects meta-analysis identified two SNPs: rs17599026 on 5q31.2 with urinary frequency (odds ratio [OR] 3.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-4.69, p-value 4.16×10(-8)) and rs7720298 on 5p15.2 with decreased urine stream (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.90-3.86, p-value=3.21×10(-8)). These SNPs lie within genes that are expressed in tissues adversely affected by pelvic radiotherapy including bladder, kidney, rectum and small intestine. The results show that heterogeneous radiotherapy cohorts can be combined to identify new moderate-penetrance genetic variants associated with radiotherapy toxicity. The work provides a basis for larger collaborative efforts to identify enough variants for a future test involving polygenic risk profiling.This work was supported by Cancer Research UK (C1094/A11728 to CMLW and NGB for the RAPPER study, C26900/A8740 to GCB, and C8197/A10865 to AMD), the Royal College of Radiologists (C26900/ A8740 to GCB), the National Institute for Health Research (GCB; no grant number), Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust (GCB; no grant number), Institute of Cancer Research (National Institute for Health Research) Biomedical Research Centre (C46/A2131 to DPD and SG), the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (NGB; no grant number), UK Medical Research Council (RG70550 to LD), the Joseph Mitchell Trust (AMD; no grant number), the Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (CMLW; no grant number), Cancer Research UK Program grant Section of Radiotherapy (C33589/ A19727 to SLG), the United States National Institutes of Health (1R01CA134444 to BSR and HO, 2P30CA014520-34 to SB, and 1K07CA187546-01A1 to SLK), the American Cancer Society (RSGT-05- 200-01-CCE to BSR), the U.S. Department of Defense (PC074201 to BSR and HO), Mount Sinai Tisch Cancer Institute Developmental Fund Award (BSR; no grant number), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (FIS PI10/00164 and PI13/02030 to AV and PI13/01136 to AC), Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER 2007–2013 to AV and AC; no grant number), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (FIS PI10/00164 and PI13/ 02030 to AV and PI13/01136 to AC), Xunta de Galicia and the European Social Fund (POS-A/2013/034 to LF), and the Alberta Cancer Board Research Initiative Program (103.0393.71760001404 to MP). AMD receives support from the REQUITE study, which is funded by the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no. 601826. Laboratory infrastructure for the RAPPER study was funded by Cancer Research UK [C8197/A10123] and the Manchester Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre. The RAPPER cohort comprises individuals and data recruited into the RT01 and CHHiP UK radiotherapy trials. The RT01 trial was supported by the UK Medical Research Council. The CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016) was supported by the Department of Health and Cancer Research UK (C8262/A7253); trial recruitment was facilitated within centers by the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network. DPD and SLG acknowledge NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.07.02

Breast cancer risks associated with missense variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes

BACKGROUND: Protein truncating variants in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with increased breast cancer risk, but risks associated with missense variants in these genes are uncertain. METHODS: We analyzed data on 59,639 breast cancer cases and 53,165 controls from studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium BRIDGES project. We sampled training (80%) and validation (20%) sets to analyze rare missense variants in ATM (1146 training variants), BRCA1 (644), BRCA2 (1425), CHEK2 (325), and PALB2 (472). We evaluated breast cancer risks according to five in silico prediction-of-deleteriousness algorithms, functional protein domain, and frequency, using logistic regression models and also mixture models in which a subset of variants was assumed to be risk-associated. RESULTS: The most predictive in silico algorithms were Helix (BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2) and CADD (ATM). Increased risks appeared restricted to functional protein domains for ATM (FAT and PIK domains) and BRCA1 (RING and BRCT domains). For ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2, data were compatible with small subsets (approximately 7%, 2%, and 0.6%, respectively) of rare missense variants giving similar risk to those of protein truncating variants in the same gene. For CHEK2, data were more consistent with a large fraction (approximately 60%) of rare missense variants giving a lower risk (OR 1.75, 95% CI (1.47-2.08)) than CHEK2 protein truncating variants. There was little evidence for an association with risk for missense variants in PALB2. The best fitting models were well calibrated in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: These results will inform risk prediction models and the selection of candidate variants for functional assays and could contribute to the clinical reporting of gene panel testing for breast cancer susceptibility

The impact of coding germline variants on contralateral breast cancer risk and survival

Evidence linking coding germline variants in breast cancer (BC)-susceptibility genes other than BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2 with contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the association of protein-truncating variants (PTVs) and rare missense variants (MSVs) in nine known (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) and 25 suspected BC-susceptibility genes with CBC risk and BCSS. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox regression models. Analyses included 34,401 women of European ancestry diagnosed with BC, including 676 CBCs and 3,449 BC deaths; the median follow-up was 10.9 years. Subtype analyses were based on estrogen receptor (ER) status of the first BC. Combined PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 and PALB2 were associated with increased CBC risk [HRs (95% CIs): 2.88 (1.70–4.87), 2.31 (1.39–3.85), 8.29 (2.53–27.21), 2.25 (1.55–3.27), and 2.67 (1.33–5.35), respectively]. The strongest evidence of association with BCSS was for PTVs and pathogenic/likely pathogenic MSVs in BRCA2 (ER-positive BC) and TP53 and PTVs in CHEK2 [HRs (95% CIs): 1.53 (1.13–2.07), 2.08 (0.95–4.57), and 1.39 (1.13–1.72), respectively, after adjusting for tumor characteristics and treatment]. HRs were essentially unchanged when censoring for CBC, suggesting that these associations are not completely explained by increased CBC risk, tumor characteristics, or treatment. There was limited evidence of associations of PTVs and/or rare MSVs with CBC risk or BCSS for the 25 suspected BC genes. The CBC findings are relevant to treatment decisions, follow-up, and screening after BC diagnosis.</p

Rare germline copy number variants (CNVs) and breast cancer risk.

Funder: CIHRGermline copy number variants (CNVs) are pervasive in the human genome but potential disease associations with rare CNVs have not been comprehensively assessed in large datasets. We analysed rare CNVs in genes and non-coding regions for 86,788 breast cancer cases and 76,122 controls of European ancestry with genome-wide array data. Gene burden tests detected the strongest association for deletions in BRCA1 (P = 3.7E-18). Nine other genes were associated with a p-value < 0.01 including known susceptibility genes CHEK2 (P = 0.0008), ATM (P = 0.002) and BRCA2 (P = 0.008). Outside the known genes we detected associations with p-values < 0.001 for either overall or subtype-specific breast cancer at nine deletion regions and four duplication regions. Three of the deletion regions were in established common susceptibility loci. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first genome-wide analysis of rare CNVs in a large breast cancer case-control dataset. We detected associations with exonic deletions in established breast cancer susceptibility genes. We also detected suggestive associations with non-coding CNVs in known and novel loci with large effects sizes. Larger sample sizes will be required to reach robust levels of statistical significance

Segregation analysis of 17,425 population-based breast cancer families: Evidence for genetic susceptibility and risk prediction.

Rare pathogenic variants in known breast cancer-susceptibility genes and known common susceptibility variants do not fully explain the familial aggregation of breast cancer. To investigate plausible genetic models for the residual familial aggregation, we studied 17,425 families ascertained through population-based probands, 86% of whom were screened for pathogenic variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, and TP53 via gene-panel sequencing. We conducted complex segregation analyses and fitted genetic models in which breast cancer incidence depended on the effects of known susceptibility genes and other unidentified major genes and a normally distributed polygenic component. The proportion of familial variance explained by the six genes was 46% at age 20-29 years and decreased steadily with age thereafter. After allowing for these genes, the best fitting model for the residual familial variance included a recessive risk component with a combined genotype frequency of 1.7% (95% CI: 0.3%-5.4%) and a penetrance to age 80 years of 69% (95% CI: 38%-95%) for homozygotes, which may reflect the combined effects of multiple variants acting in a recessive manner, and a polygenic variance of 1.27 (95% CI: 0.94%-1.65), which did not vary with age. The proportion of the residual familial variance explained by the recessive risk component was 40% at age 20-29 years and decreased with age thereafter. The model predicted age-specific familial relative risks consistent with those observed by large epidemiological studies. The findings have implications for strategies to identify new breast cancer-susceptibility genes and improve disease-risk prediction, especially at a young age

No association between polygenic risk scores for cancer and development of radiotherapy toxicity

PURPOSE: To test whether updated polygenic risk scores (PRS) for susceptibility to cancer affect risk of radiotherapy toxicity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Analyses included 9,717 patients with breast (n=3,078), prostate (n=5,748) or lung (n=891) cancer from XXXX and XXXX Consortia cohorts. Patients underwent potentially curative radiotherapy and were assessed prospectively for toxicity. Germline genotyping involved genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays with non-typed SNPs imputed. PRS for each cancer were generated by summing literature-identified cancer susceptibility risk alleles: 352 breast, 136 prostate, 24 lung. Weighted PRS were generated using log odds ratios for cancer susceptibility. Standardized total average toxicity (STAT) scores at 2 and 5 years (breast, prostate) or 6 to 12 months (lung) quantified toxicity. Primary analysis tested late STAT, secondary analyses investigated acute STAT, and individual endpoints and SNPs using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Increasing PRS did not increase risk of late toxicity in patients with breast (OR 1.000, 95%CI 0.997-1.002), prostate (OR 0.99, 95%CI 0.98-1.00; weighted PRS OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.83-1.03) or lung (OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.87-1.00; weighted PRS OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.45-1.03) cancer. Similar results were seen for acute toxicity. Secondary analyses identified rs138944387 associated with breast pain (OR=3.05; 95%CI 1.86- 5.01; P=1.09 × 10-5) and rs17513613 with breast oedema (OR=0.94; 95%CI 0.92- 0.97; P=1.08 × 1 0-5). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with increased polygenic predisposition to breast, prostate or lung cancer can safely undergo radiotherapy with no anticipated excess toxicity risk. Some individual SNPs increase likelihood of a specific toxicity endpoint warranting validation in independent cohorts and functional studies to elucidate biologic mechanisms

Radiogenomics Consortium Genome-Wide Association Study Meta-Analysis of Late Toxicity After Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

Background: A total of 10%–20% of patients develop long-term toxicity following radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Identification of common genetic variants associated with susceptibility to radiotoxicity might improve risk prediction and inform functional mechanistic studies.Methods: We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of six genome-wide association studies (n=3871) in men of European ancestry who underwent radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiotoxicities (increased urinary frequency, decreased urinary stream, hematuria, rectal bleeding) were graded prospectively. We used grouped relative risk models to test associations with approximately 6 million genotyped or imputed variants (time to first grade 2 or higher toxicity event). Variants with two-sided Pmeta less than 5 X E-8 were considered statistically significant. Bayesian false discovery probability provided an additional measure of confidence. Statistically significant variants were evaluated in three Japanese cohorts (n=962). All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Meta-analysis of the European ancestry cohorts identified three genomic signals: single nucleotide polymorphism rs17055178 with rectal bleeding (Pmeta = 6.2 X E-10), rs10969913 with decreased urinary stream (Pmeta = 2.9 X E-10), and rs11122573 with hematuria (Pmeta = 1.8 X E-8). Fine-scale mapping of these three regions was used to identify another independent signal (rs147121532) associated with hematuria (Pconditional = 4.7 X E-6). Credible causal variants at these four signals lie in gene-regulatory regions, some modulating expression of nearby genes. Previously identified variants showed consistent

No Association Between Polygenic Risk Scores for Cancer and Development of Radiation Therapy Toxicity.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to test whether updated polygenic risk scores (PRS) for susceptibility to cancer affect risk of radiation therapy toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Analyses included 9,717 patients with breast (n=3,078), prostate (n=5,748) or lung (n=891) cancer from Radiogenomics and REQUITE Consortia cohorts. Patients underwent potentially curative radiation therapy and were assessed prospectively for toxicity. Germline genotyping involved genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays with nontyped SNPs imputed. PRS for each cancer were generated by summing literature-identified cancer susceptibility risk alleles: 352 breast, 136 prostate, and 24 lung. Weighted PRS were generated using log odds ratio (ORs) for cancer susceptibility. Standardized total average toxicity (STAT) scores at 2 and 5 years (breast, prostate) or 6 to 12 months (lung) quantified toxicity. Primary analysis tested late STAT, secondary analyses investigated acute STAT, and individual endpoints and SNPs using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Increasing PRS did not increase risk of late toxicity in patients with breast (OR, 1.000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.997-1.002), prostate (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00; weighted PRS OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.03), or lung (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-1.00; weighted PRS OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.03) cancer. Similar results were seen for acute toxicity. Secondary analyses identified rs138944387 associated with breast pain (OR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.86-5.01; P = 1.09 × 10-5) and rs17513613 with breast edema (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.97; P = 1.08 × 10-5). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with increased polygenic predisposition to breast, prostate, or lung cancer can safely undergo radiation therapy with no anticipated excess toxicity risk. Some individual SNPs increase the likelihood of a specific toxicity endpoint, warranting validation in independent cohorts and functional studies to elucidate biologic mechanisms