Multiple novel prostate cancer susceptibility signals identified by fine-mapping of known risk loci among Europeans

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous common prostate cancer (PrCa) susceptibility loci. We have fine-mapped 64 GWAS regions known at the conclusion of the iCOGS study using large-scale genotyping and imputation in 25 723 PrCa cases and 26 274 controls of European ancestry. We detected evidence for multiple independent signals at 16 regions, 12 of which contained additional newly identified significant associations. A single signal comprising a spectrum of correlated variation was observed at 39 regions; 35 of which are now described by a novel more significantly associated lead SNP, while the originally reported variant remained as the lead SNP only in 4 regions. We also confirmed two association signals in Europeans that had been previously reported only in East-Asian GWAS. Based on statistical evidence and linkage disequilibrium (LD) structure, we have curated and narrowed down the list of the most likely candidate causal variants for each region. Functional annotation using data from ENCODE filtered for PrCa cell lines and eQTL analysis demonstrated significant enrichment for overlap with bio-features within this set. By incorporating the novel risk variants identified here alongside the refined data for existing association signals, we estimate that these loci now explain ∼38.9% of the familial relative risk of PrCa, an 8.9% improvement over the previously reported GWAS tag SNPs. This suggests that a significant fraction of the heritability of PrCa may have been hidden during the discovery phase of GWAS, in particular due to the presence of multiple independent signals within the same regio

Impact of sample acquisition and linear amplification on gene expression profiling of lung adenocarcinoma: laser capture micro-dissection cell-sampling versus bulk tissue-sampling

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The methods used for sample selection and processing can have a strong influence on the expression values obtained through microarray profiling. Laser capture microdissection (LCM) provides higher specificity in the selection of target cells compared to traditional bulk tissue selection methods, but at an increased processing cost. The benefit gained from the higher tissue specificity realized through LCM sampling is evaluated in this study through a comparison of microarray expression profiles obtained from same-samples using bulk and LCM processing.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Expression data from ten lung adenocarcinoma samples and six adjacent normal samples were acquired using LCM and bulk sampling methods. Expression values were evaluated for correlation between sample processing methods, as well as for bias introduced by the additional linear amplification required for LCM sample profiling.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The direct comparison of expression values obtained from the bulk and LCM sampled datasets reveals a large number of probesets with significantly varied expression. Many of these variations were shown to be related to bias arising from the process of linear amplification, which is required for LCM sample preparation. A comparison of differentially expressed genes (cancer vs. normal) selected in the bulk and LCM datasets also showed substantial differences. There were more than twice as many down-regulated probesets identified in the LCM data than identified in the bulk data. Controlling for the previously identified amplification bias did not have a substantial impact on the differences identified in the differentially expressed probesets found in the bulk and LCM samples.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>LCM-coupled microarray expression profiling was shown to uniquely identify a large number of differentially expressed probesets not otherwise found using bulk tissue sampling. The information gain realized from the LCM sampling was limited to differential analysis, as the absolute expression values obtained for some probesets using this study's protocol were biased during the second round of amplification. Consequently, LCM may enable investigators to obtain additional information in microarray studies not easily found using bulk tissue samples, but it is of critical importance that potential amplification biases are controlled for.</p

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

© 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

Germline variation at 8q24 and prostate cancer risk in men of European ancestry

Chromosome 8q24 is a susceptibility locus for multiple cancers, including prostate cancer. Here we combine genetic data across the 8q24 susceptibility region from 71,535 prostate cancer cases and 52,935 controls of European ancestry to define the overall contribution of germline variation at 8q24 to prostate cancer risk. We identify 12 independent risk signals for prostate cancer (p < 4.28 × 10−15), including three risk variants that have yet to be reported. From a polygenic risk score (PRS) model, derived to assess the cumulative effect of risk variants at 8q24, men in the top 1% of the PRS have a 4-fold (95%CI = 3.62–4.40) greater risk compared to the population average. These 12 variants account for ~25% of what can be currently explained of the familial risk of prostate cancer by known genetic risk factors. These findings highlight the overwhelming contribution of germline variation at 8q24 on prostate cancer risk which has implications for population risk stratification

Atlas of prostate cancer heritability in European and African-American men pinpoints tissue-specific regulation

Although genome-wide association studies have identified over 100 risk loci that explain ∼33% of familial risk for prostate cancer (PrCa), their functional effects on risk remain largely unknown. Here we use genotype data from 59,089 men of European and African American ancestries combined with cell-type-specific epigenetic data to build a genomic atlas of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) heritability in PrCa. We find significant differences in heritability between variants in prostate-relevant epigenetic marks defined in normal versus tumour tissue as well as between tissue and cell lines. The majority of SNP heritability lies in regions marked by H3k27 acetylation in prostate adenoc7arcinoma cell line (LNCaP) or by DNaseI hypersensitive sites in cancer cell lines. We find a high degree of similarity between European and African American ancestries suggesting a similar genetic architecture from common variation underlying PrCa risk. Our findings showcase the power of integrating functional annotation with genetic data to understand the genetic basis of PrCa

Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Sequencing Identifies Candidate Functional Variants at Prostate Cancer Risk Loci

Genome-wide association studies have identified over 150 risk loci that increase prostate cancer risk. However, few causal variants and their regulatory mechanisms have been characterized. In this study, we utilized our previously developed single-nucleotide polymorphisms sequencing (SNPs-seq) technology to test allele-dependent protein binding at 903 SNP sites covering 28 genomic regions. All selected SNPs have shown significant cis-association with at least one nearby gene. After preparing nuclear extract using LNCaP cell line, we first mixed the extract with dsDNA oligo pool for protein&ndash;DNA binding incubation. We then performed sequencing analysis on protein-bound oligos. SNPs-seq analysis showed protein-binding differences (&gt;1.5-fold) between reference and variant alleles in 380 (42%) of 903 SNPs with androgen treatment and 403 (45%) of 903 SNPs without treatment. From these significant SNPs, we performed a database search and further narrowed down to 74 promising SNPs. To validate this initial finding, we performed electrophoretic mobility shift assay in two SNPs (rs12246440 and rs7077275) at CTBP2 locus and one SNP (rs113082846) at NCOA4 locus. This analysis showed that all three SNPs demonstrated allele-dependent protein-binding differences that were consistent with the SNPs-seq. Finally, clinical association analysis of the two candidate genes showed that CTBP2 was upregulated, while NCOA4 was downregulated in prostate cancer (p &lt; 0.02). Lower expression of CTBP2 was associated with poor recurrence-free survival in prostate cancer. Utilizing our experimental data along with bioinformatic tools provides a strategy for identifying candidate functional elements at prostate cancer susceptibility loci to help guide subsequent laboratory studies

Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Sequencing Identifies Candidate Functional Variants at Prostate Cancer Risk Loci

Genome-wide association studies have identified over 150 risk loci that increase prostate cancer risk. However, few causal variants and their regulatory mechanisms have been characterized. In this study, we utilized our previously developed single-nucleotide polymorphisms sequencing (SNPs-seq) technology to test allele-dependent protein binding at 903 SNP sites covering 28 genomic regions. All selected SNPs have shown significant cis-association with at least one nearby gene. After preparing nuclear extract using LNCaP cell line, we first mixed the extract with dsDNA oligo pool for protein–DNA binding incubation. We then performed sequencing analysis on protein-bound oligos. SNPs-seq analysis showed protein-binding differences (&gt;1.5-fold) between reference and variant alleles in 380 (42%) of 903 SNPs with androgen treatment and 403 (45%) of 903 SNPs without treatment. From these significant SNPs, we performed a database search and further narrowed down to 74 promising SNPs. To validate this initial finding, we performed electrophoretic mobility shift assay in two SNPs (rs12246440 and rs7077275) at CTBP2 locus and one SNP (rs113082846) at NCOA4 locus. This analysis showed that all three SNPs demonstrated allele-dependent protein-binding differences that were consistent with the SNPs-seq. Finally, clinical association analysis of the two candidate genes showed that CTBP2 was upregulated, while NCOA4 was downregulated in prostate cancer (p &lt; 0.02). Lower expression of CTBP2 was associated with poor recurrence-free survival in prostate cancer. Utilizing our experimental data along with bioinformatic tools provides a strategy for identifying candidate functional elements at prostate cancer susceptibility loci to help guide subsequent laboratory studies.</jats:p

Abstract 1536: Whole genome sequencing of high-grade treatment-naïve prostate tumors

Abstract Prostate cancer (PCa) will impact one in six American men and many low-risk men endure therapy, while other men die of PCa. Optimal treatment selection depends on distinguishing indolent tumors from those that will cause prostate cancer specific mortality (PCSM). To date, sequencing of prostate tumor DNA has highlighted the fact that prostate tumors develop differently than other cancers. Instead of recurrent protein-altering mutations, many prostate tumors harbor “closed chain” structural rearrangements that may mediate tumor evolution. However, we do not yet understand which somatic mutations are involved in aggressive disease and PCSM. To address this crucial question, we are using whole genome sequencing to pinpoint somatic genetic features in tumor/normal paired samples from four PCSM and six non-PCSM patients with treatment-naïve, Gleason 8+ tumors. Tumor and normal DNA were sequenced to a mean coverage of 95.3X and 48.3X, respectively. Tumor DNA purity ranged from 49%-79% and tumor ploidy ranged from 1.96 to 2.22. To define the genomic landscape of aggressive PCa, we will compare our findings with published studies and genotype high-priority candidates in at least 50 additional low- and high-grade tumors. We will also compare somatic mutations in PCSM versus non-PCSM cases and use network analysis to identify pathways that may be involved in progression and metastasis. Finally, we will characterize the clonal evolution of PCa tumors using deep digital sequencing to distinguish mutations that were present in the original tumor clone from subclonal mutations that arose after oncogenesis. In this way, we aim to identify potential oncogenic drivers and candidate mediators of progression and metastasis. Ultimately, we aim to 1) Uncover somatic mutations that are specific to aggressive tumors 2) Determine whether PCSM tumors have unique genetic features, and 3) Understand the role of clonal evolution in oncogenesis and progression. As more tumors are sequenced, this approach may yield valuable markers for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment selection. Note: This abstract was not presented at the meeting. Citation Format: Brennan J. Decker, Danielle M. Karyadi, Eric Karlins, Brian W. Davis, Lori S. Tillmans, Stephen N. Thibodeau, Elaine A. Ostrander. Whole genome sequencing of high-grade treatment-naïve prostate tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 1536. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-1536</jats:p