Prediction of individual genetic risk to prostate cancer using a polygenic score

BACKGROUND Polygenic risk scores comprising established susceptibility variants have shown to be informative classifiers for several complex diseases including prostate cancer. For prostate cancer it is unknown if inclusion of genetic markers that have so far not been associated with prostate cancer risk at a genome-wide significant level will improve disease prediction. METHODS We built polygenic risk scores in a large training set comprising over 25,000 individuals. Initially 65 established prostate cancer susceptibility variants were selected. After LD pruning additional variants were prioritized based on their association with prostate cancer. Six-fold cross validation was performed to assess genetic risk scores and optimize the number of additional variants to be included. The final model was evaluated in an independent study population including 1,370 cases and 1,239 controls. RESULTS The polygenic risk score with 65 established susceptibility variants provided an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.67. Adding an additional 68 novel variants significantly increased the AUC to 0.68 (P-=-0.0012) and the net reclassification index with 0.21 (P-=-8.5E-08). All novel variants were located in genomic regions established as associated with prostate cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS Inclusion of additional genetic variants from established prostate cancer susceptibility regions improves disease prediction

Parent-of-origin-specific allelic associations among 106 genomic loci for age at menarche.

Age at menarche is a marker of timing of puberty in females. It varies widely between individuals, is a heritable trait and is associated with risks for obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, breast cancer and all-cause mortality. Studies of rare human disorders of puberty and animal models point to a complex hypothalamic-pituitary-hormonal regulation, but the mechanisms that determine pubertal timing and underlie its links to disease risk remain unclear. Here, using genome-wide and custom-genotyping arrays in up to 182,416 women of European descent from 57 studies, we found robust evidence (P < 5 × 10(-8)) for 123 signals at 106 genomic loci associated with age at menarche. Many loci were associated with other pubertal traits in both sexes, and there was substantial overlap with genes implicated in body mass index and various diseases, including rare disorders of puberty. Menarche signals were enriched in imprinted regions, with three loci (DLK1-WDR25, MKRN3-MAGEL2 and KCNK9) demonstrating parent-of-origin-specific associations concordant with known parental expression patterns. Pathway analyses implicated nuclear hormone receptors, particularly retinoic acid and γ-aminobutyric acid-B2 receptor signalling, among novel mechanisms that regulate pubertal timing in humans. Our findings suggest a genetic architecture involving at least hundreds of common variants in the coordinated timing of the pubertal transition

Circulating prolactin and in situ breast cancer risk in the European EPIC cohort: a case-control study

Introduction: The relationship between circulating prolactin and invasive breast cancer has been investigated previously, but the association between prolactin levels and in situ breast cancer risk has received less attention. Methods: We analysed the relationship between pre-diagnostic prolactin levels and the risk of in situ breast cancer overall, and by menopausal status and use of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) at blood donation. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess this association in a case-control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort, including 307 in situ breast cancer cases and their matched control subjects. Results: We found a significant positive association between higher circulating prolactin levels and risk of in situ breast cancer among all women [pre-and postmenopausal combined, ORlog2 = 1.35 (95% CI 1.04-1.76), P-trend = 0.03]. No statistically significant heterogeneity was found between prolactin levels and in situ cancer risk by menopausal status (P-het = 0.98) or baseline HT use (P-het = 0.20), although the observed association was more pronounced among postmenopausal women using HT compared to non-users (P-trend = 0.06 vs P-trend = 0.35). In subgroup analyses, the observed positive association was strongest in women diagnosed with in situ breast tumors = 4 years after blood donation (P-trend = 0.01 vs P-trend = 0.63; P-het = 0.04) and among nulliparous women compared to parous women (P-trend = 0.03 vs P-trend = 0.15; P-het = 0.07). Conclusions: Our data extends prior research linking prolactin and invasive breast cancer to the outcome of in situ breast tumours and shows that higher circulating prolactin is associated with increased risk of in situ breast cancer. The relationship between circulating prolactin and invasive breast cancer has been investigated previously, but the association between prolactin levels and in situ breast cancer risk has received less attention

A comprehensive evaluation of interaction between genetic variants and use of menopausal hormone therapy on mammographic density.

INTRODUCTION: Mammographic density is an established breast cancer risk factor with a strong genetic component and can be increased in women using menopausal hormone therapy (MHT). Here, we aimed to identify genetic variants that may modify the association between MHT use and mammographic density. METHODS: The study comprised 6,298 postmenopausal women from the Mayo Mammography Health Study and nine studies included in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. We selected for evaluation 1327 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) showing the lowest P-values for interaction (P int) in a meta-analysis of genome-wide gene-environment interaction studies with MHT use on risk of breast cancer, 2541 SNPs in candidate genes (AKR1C4, CYP1A1-CYP1A2, CYP1B1, ESR2, PPARG, PRL, SULT1A1-SULT1A2 and TNF) and ten SNPs (AREG-rs10034692, PRDM6-rs186749, ESR1-rs12665607, ZNF365-rs10995190, 8p11.23-rs7816345, LSP1-rs3817198, IGF1-rs703556, 12q24-rs1265507, TMEM184B-rs7289126, and SGSM3-rs17001868) associated with mammographic density in genome-wide studies. We used multiple linear regression models adjusted for potential confounders to evaluate interactions between SNPs and current use of MHT on mammographic density. RESULTS: No significant interactions were identified after adjustment for multiple testing. The strongest SNP-MHT interaction (unadjusted P int <0.0004) was observed with rs9358531 6.5kb 5' of PRL. Furthermore, three SNPs in PLCG2 that had previously been shown to modify the association of MHT use with breast cancer risk were found to modify also the association of MHT use with mammographic density (unadjusted P int <0.002), but solely among cases (unadjusted P int SNP×MHT×case-status <0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The study identified potential interactions on mammographic density between current use of MHT and SNPs near PRL and in PLCG2, which require confirmation. Given the moderate size of the interactions observed, larger studies are needed to identify genetic modifiers of the association of MHT use with mammographic density.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-015-0625-

Acrylamide and glycidamide hemoglobin adducts and epithelial ovarian cancer: a nested case-control study in nonsmoking postmenopausal women from the EPIC cohort

Background: Acrylamide was classified as 'probably carcinogenic to humans (group 2A)' by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the fourth cause of cancer mortality in women. Five epidemiological studies have evaluated the association between EOC risk and dietary acrylamide intake assessed using food frequency questionnaires, and one nested case-control study evaluated hemoglobin adducts of acrylamide (HbAA) and its metabolite glycidamide (HbGA) and EOC risk; the results of these studies were inconsistent. Methods: A nested case-control study in nonsmoking postmenopausal women (334 cases, 417 controls) was conducted within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to estimate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between HbAA, HbGA, HbAA+HbGA, and HbGA/HbAA and EOC and invasive serous EOC risk. Results: No overall associations were observed between biomarkers of acrylamide exposure analyzed in quintiles and EOC risk; however, positive associations were observed between some middle quintiles of HbGA and HbAA+HbGA. Elevated but non-statistically significant ORs for serous EOC were observed for HbGA and HbAA+HbGA (ORQ5vsQ1, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.96-3.81 and ORQ5vsQ1, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.94-3.83, respectively); however, no linear dose-response trends were observed. Conclusion: This EPIC nested case-control study failed to observe a clear association between biomarkers of acrylamide exposure and the risk of EOC or invasive serous EOC. Impact: It is unlikely that dietary acrylamide exposure increases ovarian cancer risk; however, additional studies with larger sample size should be performed to exclude any possible association with EOC risk

Reproductive factors and risk of hormone receptor positive and negative breast cancer: a cohort study

Background: The association of reproductive factors with hormone receptor (HR)-negative breast tumors remains uncertain. Methods: Within the EPIC cohort, Cox proportional hazards models were used to describe the relationships of reproductive factors (menarcheal age, time between menarche and first pregnancy, parity, number of children, age at first and last pregnancies, time since last full-term childbirth, breastfeeding, age at menopause, ever having an abortion and use of oral contraceptives [OC]) with risk of ER-PR-(n = 998) and ER+PR+ (n = 3,567) breast tumors. Results: A later first full-term childbirth was associated with increased risk of ER+PR+ tumors but not with risk of ER-PR-tumors (= 35 vs. = 19 years HR: 1.47 [95% CI 1.15-1.88] p(trend) < 0.001 for ER+PR+ tumors; = 35 vs. = 19 years HR: 0.93 [95% CI 0.53-1.65] p(trend) = 0.96 for ER-PR-tumors; P-het = 0.03). The risk associations of menarcheal age, and time period between menarche and first full-term childbirth with ER-PR-tumors were in the similar direction with risk of ER+PR+ tumors (p(het) = 0.50), although weaker in magnitude and statistically only borderline significant. Other parity related factors such as ever a full-term birth, number of births, age-and time since last birth were associated only with ER+PR+ malignancies, however no statistical heterogeneity between breast cancer subtypes was observed. Breastfeeding and OC use were generally not associated with breast cancer subtype risk. Conclusion: Our study provides possible evidence that age at menarche, and time between menarche and first full-term childbirth may be associated with the etiology of both HR-negative and HR-positive malignancies, although the associations with HR-negative breast cancer were only borderline significant

The Influence of Hormonal Factors on the Risk of Developing Cervical Cancer and Pre-Cancer: Results from the EPIC Cohort

Background: In addition to HPV, high parity and hormonal contraceptives have been associated with cervical cancer (CC). However, most of the evidence comes from retrospective case-control studies. The aim of this study is to prospectively evaluate associations between hormonal factors and risk of developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3)/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Methods and Findings: We followed a cohort of 308,036 women recruited in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Study. At enrollment, participants completed a questionnaire and provided serum. After a 9-year median follow-up, 261 ICC and 804 CIN3/CIS cases were reported. In a nested case-control study, the sera from 609 cases and 1,218 matched controls were tested for L1 antibodies against HPV types 11,16,18,31,33,35,45, 52,58, and antibodies against Chlamydia trachomatis and Human herpesvirus 2. Multivariate analyses were performed to estimate hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The cohort analysis showed that number of fullterm pregnancies was positively associated with CIN3/CIS risk (p-trend = 0.03). Duration of oral contraceptives use was associated with a significantly increased risk of both CIN3/CIS and ICC (HR = 1.6 and HR = 1.8 respectively for >= 15 years versus never use). Ever use of menopausal hormone therapy was associated with a reduced risk of ICC (HR = 0.5, 95% CI: 0.4-0.8). A non-significant reduced risk of ICC with ever use of intrauterine devices (IUD) was found in the nested case-control analysis (OR = 0.6). Analyses restricted to all cases and HPV seropositive controls yielded similar results, revealing a significant inverse association with IUD for combined CIN3/CIS and ICC (OR = 0.7). Conclusions: Even though HPV is the necessary cause of CC, our results suggest that several hormonal factors are risk factors for cervical carcinogenesis. Adherence to current cervical cancer screening guidelines should minimize the increased risk of CC associated with these hormonal risk factors

A prospective evaluation of early detection biomarkers for ovarian cancer in the European EPIC cohort

Purpose: About 60% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed at late stage, when 5-year survival is less than 30% in contrast to 90% for local disease. This has prompted search for early detection biomarkers. For initial testing, specimens taken months or years before ovarian cancer diagnosis are the best source of information to evaluate earlydetection biomarkers. Here we evaluate the most promising ovarian cancer screening biomarkers in prospectively collected samples from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study. Experimental Design: We measured CA125, HE4, CA72.4, and CA15.3 in 810 invasive epithelial ovarian cancer cases and 1,939 controls. We calculated the sensitivity at 95% and 98% specificity as well as area under the receiver operator curve (C-statistic) for each marker individually and in combination. In addition, we evaluated marker performance by stage at diagnosis and time between blood draw and diagnosis. Results: We observed the best discrimination between cases and controls within 6 months of diagnosis for CA125 (C-statistic = 0.92), then HE4 (0.84), CA72.4 (0.77), and CA15.3 (0.73). Marker performance declined with longer time between blood draw and diagnosis and for earlier staged disease. However, assessment of discriminatory ability at early stage was limited by small numbers. Combinations of markers performed modestly, but significantly better than any single marker. Conclusions: CA125 remains the single best marker for the early detection of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer, but can be slightly improved by combining with other markers. Identifying novel markers for ovarian cancer will require studies including larger numbers of early-stage cases. (C) 2016 AACR

Novel Associations between Common Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Risk-Predicting Mammographic Density Measures.

Mammographic density measures adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI) are heritable predictors of breast cancer risk, but few mammographic density-associated genetic variants have been identified. Using data for 10,727 women from two international consortia, we estimated associations between 77 common breast cancer susceptibility variants and absolute dense area, percent dense area and absolute nondense area adjusted for study, age, and BMI using mixed linear modeling. We found strong support for established associations between rs10995190 (in the region of ZNF365), rs2046210 (ESR1), and rs3817198 (LSP1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas (all P < 10(-5)). Of 41 recently discovered breast cancer susceptibility variants, associations were found between rs1432679 (EBF1), rs17817449 (MIR1972-2: FTO), rs12710696 (2p24.1), and rs3757318 (ESR1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas, respectively. There were associations between rs6001930 (MKL1) and both adjusted absolute dense and nondense areas, and between rs17356907 (NTN4) and adjusted absolute nondense area. Trends in all but two associations were consistent with those for breast cancer risk. Results suggested that 18% of breast cancer susceptibility variants were associated with at least one mammographic density measure. Genetic variants at multiple loci were associated with both breast cancer risk and the mammographic density measures. Further understanding of the underlying mechanisms at these loci could help identify etiologic pathways implicated in how mammographic density predicts breast cancer risk.ABCFS: The Australian Breast Cancer Family Registry (ABCFR; 1992-1995) was supported by the Australian NHMRC, the New South Wales Cancer Council, and the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia), and by grant UM1CA164920 from the USA National Cancer Institute. The Genetic Epidemiology Laboratory at the University of Melbourne has also received generous support from Mr B. Hovey and Dr and Mrs R.W. Brown to whom we are most grateful. 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 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density 5 Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR. BBCC: This study was funded in part by the ELAN-Program of the University Hospital Erlangen; Katharina Heusinger was funded by the ELAN program of the University Hospital Erlangen. BBCC was supported in part by the ELAN program of the Medical Faculty, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg. EPIC-Norfolk: This study was funded by research programme grant funding from Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council with additional support from the Stroke Association, British Heart Foundation, Department of Health, Research into Ageing and Academy of Medical Sciences. MCBCS: This study was supported by Public Health Service Grants P50 CA 116201, R01 CA 128931, R01 CA 128931-S01, R01 CA 122340, CCSG P30 CA15083, from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health and Human Services. MCCS: Melissa C. Southey is a National Health and Medical Research Council Senior Research Fellow and a Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium Group Leader. The study was supported by the Cancer Council of Victoria and by the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. MEC: National Cancer Institute: R37CA054281, R01CA063464, R01CA085265, R25CA090956, R01CA132839. MMHS: This work was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health and Human Services. (R01 CA128931, R01 CA 128931-S01, R01 CA97396, P50 CA116201, and Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA15083). Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density 6 NBCS: This study has been supported with grants from Norwegian Research Council (#183621/S10 and #175240/S10), The Norwegian Cancer Society (PK80108002, PK60287003), and The Radium Hospital Foundation as well as S-02036 from South Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority. NHS: This study was supported by Public Health Service Grants CA131332, CA087969, CA089393, CA049449, CA98233, CA128931, CA 116201, CA 122340 from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. OOA study was supported by CA122822 and X01 HG005954 from the NIH; Breast Cancer Research Fund; Elizabeth C. Crosby Research Award, Gladys E. Davis Endowed Fund, and the Office of the Vice President for Research at the University of Michigan. Genotyping services for the OOA study were provided by the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR), which is fully funded through a federal contract from the National Institutes of Health to The Johns Hopkins University, contract number HHSN268200782096. OFBCR: This work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the USA National Cancer Institute. 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 by the USA Government or the BCFR. SASBAC: The SASBAC study was supported by Märit and Hans Rausing’s Initiative against Breast Cancer, National Institutes of Health, Susan Komen Foundation and Agency for Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A*STAR). Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density 7 SIBS: SIBS was supported by program grant C1287/A10118 and project grants from Cancer Research UK (grant numbers C1287/8459). COGS grant: Collaborative Oncological Gene-environment Study (COGS) that enabled the genotyping for this study. Funding for the BCAC component is provided by grants from the EU FP7 programme (COGS) and from Cancer Research UK. Funding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from: the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post- Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAMEON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via American Association for Cancer Research at http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2015/04/10/0008-5472.CAN-14-2012.abstract