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

Combining Asian and European genome-wide association studies of colorectal cancer improves risk prediction across racial and ethnic populations

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have great potential to guide precision colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention by identifying those at higher risk to undertake targeted screening. However, current PRS using European ancestry data have sub-optimal performance in non-European ancestry populations, limiting their utility among these populations. Towards addressing this deficiency, we expand PRS development for CRC by incorporating Asian ancestry data (21,731 cases; 47,444 controls) into European ancestry training datasets (78,473 cases; 107,143 controls). The AUC estimates (95% CI) of PRS are 0.63(0.62-0.64), 0.59(0.57-0.61), 0.62(0.60-0.63), and 0.65(0.63-0.66) in independent datasets including 1681-3651 cases and 8696-115,105 controls of Asian, Black/African American, Latinx/Hispanic, and non-Hispanic White, respectively. They are significantly better than the European-centric PRS in all four major US racial and ethnic groups (p-values < 0.05). Further inclusion of non-European ancestry populations, especially Black/African American and Latinx/Hispanic, is needed to improve the risk prediction and enhance equity in applying PRS in clinical practice