81 research outputs found

    Coding variants in NOD-like receptors: An association study on risk and survival of colorectal cancer

    Get PDF
    Nod-like receptors (NLRs) are important innate pattern recognition receptors and regulators of inflammation or play a role during development. We systematically analysed 41 non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 21 NLR genes in a Czech discovery cohort of sporadic colorectal cancer (CRC) (1237 cases, 787 controls) for their association with CRC risk and survival. Five SNPs were found to be associated with CRC risk and eight with survival at 5% significance level. In a replication analysis using data of two large genome-wide association studies (GWASs) from Germany (DACHS: 1798 cases and 1810 controls) and Scotland (2210 cases and 9350 controls) the associations found in the Czech discovery set were not confirmed. However, expression analysis in human gut-related tissues and immune cells revealed that the NLRs associated with CRC risk or survival in the discovery set were expressed in primary human colon or rectum cells, CRC tissue and/or cell lines, providing preliminary evidence for a potential involvement of NLRs in general in CRC development and/or progression. Most interesting was the finding that the enigmatic development-related NLRP5 (also known as MATER) was not expressed in normal colon tissue but in colon cancer tissue and cell lines. Future studies may show whether regulatory variants instead of coding variants might affect the expression of NLRs and contribute to CRC risk and survival

    Refinement of the associations between risk of colorectal cancer and polymorphisms on chromosomes 1q41 and 12q13.13

    Get PDF
    In genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of colorectal cancer, we have identified two genomic regions in which pairs of tagging-single nucleotide polymorphisms (tagSNPs) are associated with disease; these comprise chromosomes 1q41 (rs6691170, rs6687758) and 12q13.13 (rs7163702, rs11169552). We investigated these regions further, aiming to determine whether they contain more than one independent association signal and/or to identify the SNPs most strongly associated with disease. Genotyping of additional sample sets at the original tagSNPs showed that, for both regions, the two tagSNPs were unlikely to identify a single haplotype on which the functional variation lay. Conversely, one of the pair of SNPs did not fully capture the association signal in each region. We therefore undertook more detailed analyses, using imputation, logistic regression, genealogical analysis using the GENECLUSTER program and haplotype analysis. In the 1q41 region, the SNP rs11118883 emerged as a strong candidate based on all these analyses, sufficient to account for the signals at both rs6691170 and rs6687758. rs11118883 lies within a region with strong evidence of transcriptional regulatory activity and has been associated with expression of PDGFRB mRNA. For 12q13.13, a complex situation was found: SNP rs7972465 showed stronger association than either rs11169552 or rs7136702, and GENECLUSTER found no good evidence for a two-SNP model. However, logistic regression and haplotype analyses supported a two-SNP model, in which a signal at the SNP rs706793 was added to that at rs11169552. Post-GWAS fine-mapping studies are challenging, but the use of multiple tools can assist in identifying candidate functional variants in at least some cases

    Germline Variants and Advanced Colorectal Adenomas:Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib Trial Genome-wide Association Study

    Get PDF
    Abstract not availableJiping Wang, Luis G. Carvajal-Carmona, Jen-Hwa Chu, Ann G. Zauber, APC Trial Collaborators, Michikai Kubo, Koichi Matsuda, Malcolm Dunlop, Richard S. Houlston, Oliver Sieber, Lara Lipton, Peter Gibbs, Nicholas G. Martin, Grant W. Montgomery, Joanne Young, Paul N. Baird, Mark J. Ratain, Yusuke Nakamura, Scott T. Weiss, Ian Tomlinson, and Monica M. Bertagnoll

    Recurrent Coding Sequence Variation Explains only A Small Fraction of the Genetic Architecture of Colorectal Cancer

    Get PDF
    Whilst common genetic variation in many non-coding genomic regulatory regions are known to impart risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), much of the heritability of CRC remains unexplained. To examine the role of recurrent coding sequence variation in CRC aetiology, we genotyped 12,638 CRCs cases and 29,045 controls from six European populations. Single-variant analysis identified a coding variant (rs3184504) in SH2B3 (12q24) associated with CRC risk (OR = 1.08, P = 3.9 × 10-7), and novel damaging coding variants in 3 genes previously tagged by GWAS efforts; rs16888728 (8q24) in UTP23 (OR = 1.15, P = 1.4 × 10-7); rs6580742 and rs12303082 (12q13) in FAM186A (OR = 1.11, P = 1.2 × 10-

    Five endometrial cancer risk loci identified through genome-wide association analysis.

    Get PDF
    We conducted a meta-analysis of three endometrial cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and two follow-up phases totaling 7,737 endometrial cancer cases and 37,144 controls of European ancestry. Genome-wide imputation and meta-analysis identified five new risk loci of genome-wide significance at likely regulatory regions on chromosomes 13q22.1 (rs11841589, near KLF5), 6q22.31 (rs13328298, in LOC643623 and near HEY2 and NCOA7), 8q24.21 (rs4733613, telomeric to MYC), 15q15.1 (rs937213, in EIF2AK4, near BMF) and 14q32.33 (rs2498796, in AKT1, near SIVA1). We also found a second independent 8q24.21 signal (rs17232730). Functional studies of the 13q22.1 locus showed that rs9600103 (pairwise r(2) = 0.98 with rs11841589) is located in a region of active chromatin that interacts with the KLF5 promoter region. The rs9600103[T] allele that is protective in endometrial cancer suppressed gene expression in vitro, suggesting that regulation of the expression of KLF5, a gene linked to uterine development, is implicated in tumorigenesis. These findings provide enhanced insight into the genetic and biological basis of endometrial cancer.I.T. is supported by Cancer Research UK and the Oxford Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre. T.H.T.C. is supported by the Rhodes Trust and the Nuffield Department of Medicine. Funding for iCOGS infrastructure came from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692 and C8197/A16565), the US National Institutes of Health (R01 CA128978, U19 CA148537, U19 CA148065 and U19 CA148112), the US Department of Defense (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, the Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. SEARCH recruitment was funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK (C490/A10124). Stage 1 and stage 2 case genotyping was supported by the NHMRC (552402 and 1031333). Control data were generated by the WTCCC, and a full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the data is available from the WTCCC website. We acknowledge use of DNA from the British 1958 Birth Cohort collection, funded by UK Medical Research Council grant G0000934 and Wellcome Trust grant 068545/Z/02; funding for this project was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award 085475. NSECG was supported by the European Union's Framework Programme 7 CHIBCHA grant and Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics Core Grant 090532/Z/09Z, and CORGI was funded by Cancer Research UK. BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118 and C1287/A12014). OCAC is supported by a grant from the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund thanks to donations by the family and friends of Kathryn Sladek Smith (PPD/RPCI.07) and the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.356
    corecore