A comprehensive analysis of common genetic variation in prolactin (PRL) and PRL receptor (PRLR) genes in relation to plasma prolactin levels and breast cancer risk: the Multiethnic Cohort

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Studies in animals and humans clearly indicate a role for prolactin (PRL) in breast epithelial proliferation, differentiation, and tumorigenesis. Prospective epidemiological studies have also shown that women with higher circulating PRL levels have an increase in risk of breast cancer, suggesting that variability in PRL may also be important in determining a woman's risk.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluated genetic variation in the PRL and PRL receptor (PRLR) genes as predictors of plasma PRL levels and breast cancer risk among African-American, Native Hawaiian, Japanese-American, Latina, and White women in the Multiethnic Cohort Study (MEC). We selected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from both the public (dbSNP) and private (Celera) databases to construct high density SNP maps that included up to 20 kilobases (kb) upstream of the transcription initiation site and 10 kb downstream of the last exon of each gene, for a total coverage of 59 kb in PRL and 210 kb in PRLR. We genotyped 80 SNPs in PRL and 173 SNPs in PRLR in a multiethnic panel of 349 unaffected subjects to characterize linkage disequilibrium (LD) and haplotype patterns. We sequenced the coding regions of PRL and PRLR in 95 advanced breast cancer cases (19 of each racial/ethnic group) to uncover putative functional variation. A total of 33 and 60 haplotype "tag" SNPs (tagSNPs) that allowed for high predictability (R_h²≥ 0.70) of the common haplotypes in PRL and PRLR, respectively, were then genotyped in a multiethnic breast cancer case-control study of 1,615 invasive breast cancer cases and 1,962 controls in the MEC. We also assessed the association of common genetic variation with circulating PRL levels in 362 postmenopausal controls without a history of hormone therapy use at blood draw. Because of the large number of comparisons being performed we used a relatively stringent type I error criteria (p < 0.0005) for evaluating the significance of any single association to correct for performing approximately 100 independent tests, close to the number of tagSNPs genotyped for both genes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We observed no significant associations between PRL and PRLR haplotypes or individual SNPs in relation to breast cancer risk. A nominally significant association was noted between prolactin levels and a tagSNP (tagSNP 44, rs2244502) in intron 1 of PRL. This SNP showed approximately a 50% increase in levels between minor allele homozygotes vs. major allele homozygotes. However, this association was not significant (p = 0.002) using our type I error criteria to correct for multiple testing, nor was this SNP associated with breast cancer risk (p = 0.58).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In this comprehensive analysis covering 59 kb of the PRL locus and 210 kb of the PRLR locus, we found no significant association between common variation in these candidate genes and breast cancer risk or plasma PRL levels. The LD characterization of PRL and PRLR in this multiethnic population provide a framework for studying these genes in relation to other disease outcomes that have been associated with PRL, as well as for larger studies of plasma PRL levels.</p

Two Novel Susceptibility Loci for Prostate Cancer in Men of African Ancestry.

Prostate cancer incidence is 1.6-fold higher in African Americans than in other populations. The risk factors that drive this disparity are unknown and potentially consist of social, environmental, and genetic influences. To investigate the genetic basis of prostate cancer in men of African ancestry, we performed a genome-wide association meta-analysis using two-sided statistical tests in 10 202 case subjects and 10 810 control subjects. We identified novel signals on chromosomes 13q34 and 22q12, with the risk-associated alleles found only in men of African ancestry (13q34: rs75823044, risk allele frequency = 2.2%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37 to 1.76, P = 6.10 × 10-12; 22q12.1: rs78554043, risk allele frequency = 1.5%, OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.39 to 1.89, P = 7.50 × 10-10). At 13q34, the signal is located 5' of the gene IRS2 and 3' of a long noncoding RNA, while at 22q12 the candidate functional allele is a missense variant in the CHEK2 gene. These findings provide further support for the role of ancestry-specific germline variation in contributing to population differences in prostate cancer risk

Multiple regions within 8q24 independently affect risk for prostate cancer.

After the recent discovery that common genetic variation in 8q24 influences inherited risk of prostate cancer, we genotyped 2,973 SNPs in up to 7,518 men with and without prostate cancer from five populations. We identified seven risk variants, five of them previously undescribed, spanning 430 kb and each independently predicting risk for prostate cancer (P = 7.9 x 10(-19) for the strongest association, and P &lt; 1.5 x 10(-4) for five of the variants, after controlling for each of the others). The variants define common genotypes that span a more than fivefold range of susceptibility to cancer in some populations. None of the prostate cancer risk variants aligns to a known gene or alters the coding sequence of an encoded protein

Evaluating genetic risk for prostate cancer among Japanese and Latinos.

BACKGROUND: There have been few genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of prostate cancer among diverse populations. To search for novel prostate cancer risk variants, we conducted GWAS of prostate cancer in Japanese and Latinos. In addition, we tested prostate cancer risk variants and developed genetic risk models of prostate cancer for Japanese and Latinos. METHODS: Our first-stage GWAS of prostate cancer included Japanese (cases/controls = 1,033/1,042) and Latino (cases/controls = 1,043/1,057) from the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC). Significant associations from stage I (P &lt; 1.0 × 10(-4)) were examined in silico in GWAS of prostate cancer (stage II) in Japanese (cases/controls = 1,583/3,386) and Europeans (cases/controls = 1,854/1,894). RESULTS: No novel stage I single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) outside of known risk regions reached genome-wide significance. For Japanese, in stage I, the most notable putative novel association was seen with 10 SNPs (P ≤ 8.0 × 10(-6)) at chromosome 2q33; however, this was not replicated in stage II. For Latinos, the most significant association was observed with rs17023900 at the known 3p12 risk locus (stage I: OR = 1.45; P = 7.01 × 10(-5) and stage II: OR = 1.58; P = 3.05 × 10(-7)). The majority of the established risk variants for prostate cancer, 79% and 88%, were positively associated with prostate cancer in Japanese and Latinos (stage I), respectively. The cumulative effects of these variants significantly influence prostate cancer risk (OR per allele = 1.10; P = 2.71 × 10(-25) and OR = 1.07; P = 1.02 × 10(-16) for Japanese and Latinos, respectively). CONCLUSION AND IMPACT: Our GWAS of prostate cancer did not identify novel genome-wide significant variants. However, our findings show that established risk variants for prostate cancer significantly contribute to risk among Japanese and Latinos

Configurational accessibility study of road and metro network in Shanghai

link_to_subscribed_fulltex