Fine-mapping of prostate cancer susceptibility loci in a large meta-analysis identifies candidate causal variants

Prostate cancer is a polygenic disease with a large heritable component. A number of common, low-penetrance prostate cancer risk loci have been identified through GWAS. Here we apply the Bayesian multivariate variable selection algorithm JAM to fine-map 84 prostate cancer susceptibility loci, using summary data from a large European ancestry meta-analysis. We observe evidence for multiple independent signals at 12 regions and 99 risk signals overall. Only 15 original GWAS tag SNPs remain among the catalogue of candidate variants identified; the remainder are replaced by more likely candidates. Biological annotation of our credible set of variants indicates significant enrichment within promoter and enhancer elements, and transcription factor-binding sites, including AR, ERG and FOXA1. In 40 regions at least one variant is colocalised with an eQTL in prostate cancer tissue. The refined set of candidate variants substantially increase the proportion of familial relative risk explained by these known susceptibility regions, which highlights the importance of fine-mapping studies and has implications for clinical risk profiling. © 2018 The Author(s).Prostate cancer is a polygenic disease with a large heritable component. A number of common, low-penetrance prostate cancer risk loci have been identified through GWAS. Here we apply the Bayesian multivariate variable selection algorithm JAM to fine-map 84 prostate cancer susceptibility loci, using summary data from a large European ancestry meta-analysis. We observe evidence for multiple independent signals at 12 regions and 99 risk signals overall. Only 15 original GWAS tag SNPs remain among the catalogue of candidate variants identified; the remainder are replaced by more likely candidates. Biological annotation of our credible set of variants indicates significant enrichment within promoter and enhancer elements, and transcription factor-binding sites, including AR, ERG and FOXA1. In 40 regions at least one variant is colocalised with an eQTL in prostate cancer tissue. The refined set of candidate variants substantially increase the proportion of familial relative risk explained by these known susceptibility regions, which highlights the importance of fine-mapping studies and has implications for clinical risk profiling. © 2018 The Author(s).Peer reviewe

Observational and genetic associations between cardiorespiratory fitness and cancer: a UK Biobank and international consortia study

Background The association of fitness with cancer risk is not clear. Methods We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for risk of lung, colorectal, endometrial, breast, and prostate cancer in a subset of UK Biobank participants who completed a submaximal fitness test in 2009-12 (N = 72,572). We also investigated relationships using two-sample Mendelian randomisation (MR), odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using the inverse-variance weighted method. Results After a median of 11 years of follow-up, 4290 cancers of interest were diagnosed. A 3.5 ml O2⋅min−1⋅kg−1 total-body mass increase in fitness (equivalent to 1 metabolic equivalent of task (MET), approximately 0.5 standard deviation (SD)) was associated with lower risks of endometrial (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.73–0.89), colorectal (0.94, 0.90–0.99), and breast cancer (0.96, 0.92–0.99). In MR analyses, a 0.5 SD increase in genetically predicted O2⋅min−1⋅kg−1 fat-free mass was associated with a lower risk of breast cancer (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86–0.98). After adjusting for adiposity, both the observational and genetic associations were attenuated. Discussion Higher fitness levels may reduce risks of endometrial, colorectal, and breast cancer, though relationships with adiposity are complex and may mediate these relationships. Increasing fitness, including via changes in body composition, may be an effective strategy for cancer prevention

An integrative multi-omics analysis to identify candidate DNA methylation biomarkers related to prostate cancer risk

It remains elusive whether some of the associations identified in genome-wide association studies of prostate cancer (PrCa) may be due to regulatory effects of genetic variants on CpG sites, which may further influence expression of PrCa target genes. To search for Cp

Identification of multiple risk loci and regulatory mechanisms influencing susceptibility to multiple myeloma

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have transformed our understanding of susceptibility to multiple myeloma (MM), but much of the heritability remains unexplained. We report a new GWAS, a meta-analysis with previous GWAS and a replication series, totalling 9974 MM cases and 247,556 controls of European ancestry. Collectively, these data provide evidence for six new MM risk loci, bringing the total number to 23. Integration of information from gene expression, epigenetic profiling and in situ Hi-C data for the 23 risk loci implicate disruption of developmental transcriptional regulators as a basis of MM susceptibility, compatible with altered B-cell differentiation as a key mechanism. Dysregulation of autophagy/apoptosis and cell cycle signalling feature as recurrently perturbed pathways. Our findings provide further insight

Genetic counselling and testing of susceptibility genes for therapeutic decision-making in breast cancer—an European consensus statement and expert recommendations

An international panel of experts representing 17 European countries and Israel convened to discuss current needs and future developments in BRCA testing and counselling and to issue consensus recommendations. The experts agreed that, with the increasing availability of high-throughput testing platforms and the registration of poly-ADP-ribose-polymerase inhibitors, the need for genetic counselling and testing will rapidly increase in the near future. Consequently, the already existing shortage of genetic counsellors is expected to worsen and to compromise the quality of care particularly in individuals and families with suspected or proven hereditary breast or ovarian cancer. Increasing educational efforts within the breast cancer caregiver community may alleviate this limitation by enabling all involved specialities to perform genetic counselling. In the therapeutic setting, for patients with a clinical suspicion of genetic susceptibility and if the results may have an immediate impact on the therapeutic strategy, the majority voted that BRCA1/2 testing should be performed after histological diagnosis of breast cancer, regardless of oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. Experts also agreed that, in the predictive and therapeutic setting, genetic testing should be limited to individuals with a personal or family history suggestive of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant and should also include high-risk actionable genes beyond BRCA1/2. Of high-risk actionable genes, all pathological variants (i.e. class IV and V) should be reported; class III variants of unknown significance, should be reported provided that the current lack of clinical utility of the variant is expressly stated. Genetic counselling should always address the possibility that already tested individuals might be re-contacted in case new information on a particular variant results in a re-classification

Genetic counselling and testing of susceptibility genes for therapeutic decision-making in breast cancer-an European consensus statement and expert recommendations

Càrrega feta de Scopus d'articles UAB 2019 (Gold, hybrid o Bronze) procedents de l'Observatori d'Accés Obert (càrrega maig 2020). Compte! Cal comprovar la versió permesa per l'editor en els bronze.Travel expenses for (some) participants were sponsored by an unrestricted grant from AstraZeneca (AZ). AZ had no role in the organization of the meeting, in the invitation of panel members, and in the selection of questions. Participants were solely selected because of scientific expertise in the BRCA field and regional distribution, thereby representing European countries and Israel.Margit Hemetsberger, hemetsberger medical services, Vienna, Austria, helped with the writing of this manuscript. Philipp Pappenscheller, Vienna Medical University, helped with the evaluation of the questionnaires and voting results and the organisation of the meeting. D Gareth Evans is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre.An international panel of experts representing 17 European countries and Israel convened to discuss current needs and future developments in BRCA testing and counselling and to issue consensus recommendations. The experts agreed that, with the increasing availability of high-throughput testing platforms and the registration of poly-ADP-ribose-polymerase inhibitors, the need for genetic counselling and testing will rapidly increase in the near future. Consequently, the already existing shortage of genetic counsellors is expected to worsen and to compromise the quality of care particularly in individuals and families with suspected or proven hereditary breast or ovarian cancer. Increasing educational efforts within the breast cancer caregiver community may alleviate this limitation by enabling all involved specialities to perform genetic counselling. In the therapeutic setting, for patients with a clinical suspicion of genetic susceptibility and if the results may have an immediate impact on the therapeutic strategy, the majority voted that BRCA1/2 testing should be performed after histological diagnosis of breast cancer, regardless of oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. Experts also agreed that, in the predictive and therapeutic setting, genetic testing should be limited to individuals with a personal or family history suggestive of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant and should also include high-risk actionable genes beyond BRCA1/2. Of high-risk actionable genes, all pathological variants (i.e. class IV and V) should be reported; class III variants of unknown significance, should be reported provided that the current lack of clinical utility of the variant is expressly stated. Genetic counselling should always address the possibility that already tested individuals might be re-contacted in case new information on a particular variant results in a re-classification