Identifying and correcting epigenetics measurements for systematic sources of variation

Abstract Background Methylation measures quantified by microarray techniques can be affected by systematic variation due to the technical processing of samples, which may compromise the accuracy of the measurement process and contribute to bias the estimate of the association under investigation. The quantification of the contribution of the systematic source of variation is challenging in datasets characterized by hundreds of thousands of features. In this study, we introduce a method previously developed for the analysis of metabolomics data to evaluate the performance of existing normalizing techniques to correct for unwanted variation. Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450K was used to acquire methylation levels in over 421,000 CpG sites for 902 study participants of a case-control study on breast cancer nested within the EPIC cohort. The principal component partial R-square (PC-PR2) analysis was used to identify and quantify the variability attributable to potential systematic sources of variation. Three correcting techniques, namely ComBat, surrogate variables analysis (SVA) and a linear regression model to compute residuals were applied. The impact of each correcting method on the association between smoking status and DNA methylation levels was evaluated, and results were compared with findings from a large meta-analysis. Results A sizeable proportion of systematic variability due to variables expressing ‘batch’ and ‘sample position’ within ‘chip’ was identified, with values of the partial R2 statistics equal to 9.5 and 11.4% of total variation, respectively. After application of ComBat or the residuals’ methods, the contribution was 1.3 and 0.2%, respectively. The SVA technique resulted in a reduced variability due to ‘batch’ (1.3%) and ‘sample position’ (0.6%), and in a diminished variability attributable to ‘chip’ within a batch (0.9%). After ComBat or the residuals’ corrections, a larger number of significant sites (k = 600 and k = 427, respectively) were associated to smoking status than the SVA correction (k = 96). Conclusions The three correction methods removed systematic variation in DNA methylation data, as assessed by the PC-PR2, which lent itself as a useful tool to explore variability in large dimension data. SVA produced more conservative findings than ComBat in the association between smoking and DNA methylation

Breast Cancer Risk From Modifiable and Nonmodifiable Risk Factors Among White Women in the United States

An improved model for risk stratification can be useful for guiding public health strategies of breast cancer prevention

Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes

Stratification of women according to their risk of breast cancer based on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could improve screening and prevention strategies. Our aim was to develop PRSs, optimized for prediction of estrogen receptor (ER)-specific disease, from the largest available genome-wide association dataset and to empirically validate the PRSs in prospective studies. The development dataset comprised 94,075 case subjects and 75,017 control subjects of European ancestry from 69 studies, divided into training and validation sets. Samples were genotyped using genome-wide arrays, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected by stepwise regression or lasso penalized regression. The best performing PRSs were validated in an independent test set comprising 11,428 case subjects and 18,323 control subjects from 10 prospective studies and 190,040 women from UK Biobank (3,215 incident breast cancers). For the best PRSs (313 SNPs), the odds ratio for overall disease per 1 standard deviation in ten prospective studies was 1.61 (95%CI: 1.57-1.65) with area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) = 0.630 (95%CI: 0.628-0.651). The lifetime risk of overall breast cancer in the top centile of the PRSs was 32.6%. Compared with women in the middle quintile, those in the highest 1% of risk had 4.37- and 2.78-fold risks, and those in the lowest 1% of risk had 0.16- and 0.27-fold risks, of developing ER-positive and ER-negative disease, respectively. Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that this PRS was well calibrated and predicts disease risk accurately in the tails of the distribution. This PRS is a powerful and reliable predictor of breast cancer risk that may improve breast cancer prevention programs.NovartisEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaAbbViePfizer UKCelgeneEisaiGenentechMerck Sharp and DohmeRocheCancer Research UKGovernment of CanadaArray BioPharmaGenome CanadaNational Institutes of HealthEuropean CommissionMinistère de l'Économie, de l’Innovation et des Exportations du QuébecSeventh Framework ProgrammeCanadian Institutes of Health Researc

Common germline polymorphisms associated with breast cancer-specific survival

Abstract Introduction Previous studies have identified common germline variants nominally associated with breast cancer survival. These associations have not been widely replicated in further studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of previously reported SNPs with breast cancer-specific survival using data from a pooled analysis of eight breast cancer survival genome-wide association studies (GWAS) from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Methods A literature review was conducted of all previously published associations between common germline variants and three survival outcomes: breast cancer-specific survival, overall survival and disease-free survival. All associations that reached the nominal significance level of P value <0.05 were included. Single nucleotide polymorphisms that had been previously reported as nominally associated with at least one survival outcome were evaluated in the pooled analysis of over 37,000 breast cancer cases for association with breast cancer-specific survival. Previous associations were evaluated using a one-sided test based on the reported direction of effect. Results Fifty-six variants from 45 previous publications were evaluated in the meta-analysis. Fifty-four of these were evaluated in the full set of 37,954 breast cancer cases with 2,900 events and the two additional variants were evaluated in a reduced sample size of 30,000 samples in order to ensure independence from the previously published studies. Five variants reached nominal significance (P <0.05) in the pooled GWAS data compared to 2.8 expected under the null hypothesis. Seven additional variants were associated (P <0.05) with ER-positive disease. Conclusions Although no variants reached genome-wide significance (P <5 x 10−8), these results suggest that there is some evidence of association between candidate common germline variants and breast cancer prognosis. Larger studies from multinational collaborations are necessary to increase the power to detect associations, between common variants and prognosis, at more stringent significance levels

Genetic risk variants associated with in situ breast cancer

Abstract Introduction: Breast cancer in situ (BCIS) diagnoses, a precursor lesion for invasive breast cancer, comprise about 20 % of all breast cancers (BC) in countries with screening programs. Family history of BC is considered one of the strongest risk factors for BCIS. Methods: To evaluate the association of BC susceptibility loci with BCIS risk, we genotyped 39 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), associated with risk of invasive BC, in 1317 BCIS cases, 10,645 invasive BC cases, and 14,006 healthy controls in the National Cancer Institute&apos;s Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). Using unconditional logistic regression models adjusted for age and study, we estimated the association of SNPs with BCIS using two different comparison groups: healthy controls and invasive BC subjects to investigate whether BCIS and BC share a common genetic profile. Results: We found that five SNPs (CDKN2BAS-rs1011970, FGFR2-rs3750817, FGFR2-rs2981582, TNRC9-rs3803662, 5p12-rs10941679) were significantly associated with BCIS risk (P value adjusted for multiple comparisons &lt;0.0016). Comparing invasive BC and BCIS, the largest difference was for CDKN2BAS-rs1011970, which showed a positive association with BCIS (OR = 1.24, 95 % CI: 1.11-1.38, P = 1.27 x 1

Mitochondrial Dna Copy Number Variation, Leukocyte Telomere Length, And Breast Cancer Risk In The European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer And Nutrition (epic) Study

Background: Leukocyte telomere length (LTL) and mitochondrial genome (mtDNA) copy number and deletions have been proposed as risk markers for various cancer types, including breast cancer (BC).& para;& para;Methods: To gain a more comprehensive picture on how these markers can modulate BC risk, alone or in conjunction, we performed simultaneous measurements of LTL and mtDNA copy number in up to 570 BC cases and 538 controls from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. As a first step, we measured LTL and mtDNA copy number in 96 individuals for which a blood sample had been collected twice with an interval of 15 years.& para;& para;Results: According to the intraclass correlation (ICC), we found very good stability over the time period for both measurements, with ICCs of 0.63 for LTL and 0.60 for mtDNA copy number. In the analysis of the entire study sample, we observed that longer LTL was strongly associated with increased risk of BC (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.58-4.65, p = 3.07 x 10(-4) for highest vs. lowest quartile; OR 3.20, 95% CI 1.57-6.55, p = 1.41 x 10(-3) as a continuous variable). We did not find any association between mtDNA copy number and BC risk; however, when considering only the functional copies, we observed an increased risk of developing estrogen receptor-positive BC (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.05-5.80, p = 0.04 for highest vs. lowest quartile).& para;& para;Conclusions: We observed a very good correlation between the markers over a period of 15 years. We confirm a role of LTL in BC carcinogenesis and suggest an effect of mtDNA copy number on BC risk

Genetic risk variants associated with in situ breast cancer

Introduction: Breast cancer in situ (BCIS) diagnoses, a precursor lesion for invasive breast cancer, comprise about 20 % of all breast cancers (BC) in countries with screening programs. Family history of BC is considered one of the strongest risk factors for BCIS. Methods: To evaluate the association of BC susceptibility loci with BCIS risk, we genotyped 39 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), associated with risk of invasive BC, in 1317 BCIS cases, 10,645 invasive BC cases, and 14,006 healthy controls in the National Cancer Institute’s Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). Using unconditional logistic regression models adjusted for age and study, we estimated the association of SNPs with BCIS using two different comparison groups: healthy controls and invasive BC subjects to investigate whether BCIS and BC share a common genetic profile. Results: We found that five SNPs (CDKN2BAS-rs1011970, FGFR2-rs3750817, FGFR2-rs2981582, TNRC9-rs3803662, 5p12-rs10941679) were significantly associated with BCIS risk (P value adjusted for multiple comparisons <0.0016). Comparing invasive BC and BCIS, the largest difference was for CDKN2BAS-rs1011970, which showed a positive association with BCIS (OR = 1.24, 95 % CI: 1.11–1.38, P = 1.27 x 10−4) and no association with invasive BC (OR = 1.03, 95 % CI: 0.99–1.07, P = 0.06), with a P value for case-case comparison of 0.006. Subgroup analyses investigating associations with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) found similar associations, albeit less significant (OR = 1.25, 95 % CI: 1.09–1.42, P = 1.07 x 10−3). Additional risk analyses showed significant associations with invasive disease at the 0.05 level for 28 of the alleles and the OR estimates were consistent with those reported by other studies. Conclusions: Our study adds to the knowledge that several of the known BC susceptibility loci are risk factors for both BCIS and invasive BC, with the possible exception of rs1011970, a putatively functional SNP situated in the CDKN2BAS gene that may be a specific BCIS susceptibility locus. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13058-015-0596-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Interactions between breast cancer susceptibility loci and menopausal hormone therapy in relationship to breast cancer in the Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium

Current use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) has important implications for postmenopausal breast cancer risk, and observed associations might be modified by known breast cancer susceptibility loci. To provide the most comprehensive assessment of interactions of prospectively collected data on MHT and 17 confirmed susceptibility loci with invasive breast cancer risk, a nested case–control design among eight cohorts within the NCI Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium was used. Based on data from 13,304 cases and 15,622 controls, multivariable-adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Effect modification of current and past use was evaluated on the multiplicative scale. P values −3 were considered statistically significant. The strongest evidence of effect modification was observed for current MHT by 9q31-rs865686. Compared to never users of MHT with the rs865686 GG genotype, the association between current MHT use and breast cancer risk for the TT genotype (OR 1.79, 95 % CI 1.43–2.24; Pinteraction = 1.2 × 10−4) was less than expected on the multiplicative scale. There are no biological implications of the sub-multiplicative interaction between MHT and rs865686. Menopausal hormone therapy is unlikely to have a strong interaction with the common genetic variants associated with invasive breast cancer

Validation of breast cancer risk model incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk scores in 14 prospective cohort studies in 6 countries

Background: Prospective validation of breast cancer risk models integrating classical risk factors and genetic variants is required for risk-stratified prevention and screening strategies. The objective of this study was to validate a breast cancer risk model integrating classical risk factors and a 313-variant polygenic risk score (PRS) in multiple prospective cohort studies, and to project five-year risk of breast cancer in six different countries.Methods: The study population included 7,529 cases and 230,103 controls from 14 prospective cohort studies in Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, and USA. We used the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimator (iCARE) tool for risk model building, validation, and risk projection. Expected five-year risk of invasive or in situ breast cancer was compared to observed risk, overall and within deciles of expected risk using goodness of fit statistics. We evaluated calibration of the relative risk through meta-analysis across cohorts, and of the absolute risk within each cohort. Model discrimination was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), and percentages of women crossing risk thresholds. Projections of five-year risk distributions were estimated for women of European ancestry aged 50-70 years in the general populations of these six countries.Results: Analysis showed overall good calibration of the integrated iCARE-based model relative risk for both women younger than 50 years (χ2=14.9, P=0.09) and aged 50 years or older (χ2=14.6, P=0.10), with a small overestimation of risk for women in the highest decile of expected risk (RR = 3.5 expected vs 2.3 (95% CI 1.6 to 3.2) observed for women &lt;50 years; and 2.8 expected vs 2.3 (95% CI 2.0 to 2.7) observed for women 50+ years). The age-adjusted AUCs for the integrated model were 63.1 (95% CI 60.9 to 65.3) and 62.9 (95% CI 61.8 to 64.0), for the two age groups respectively. The calibration of absolute risk showed substantial variation across cohorts, particularly for the older group, but had no systematic bias. Model based projections in the general populations showed that compared to the population average, women in the 1st and 99th percentiles of the integrated risk score had relative risks 0.19 and 3.56 respectively. The proportion of women of European ancestry aged 50-70 years with a five-year risk greater than 3% (threshold for consideration of risk-lowering drugs by U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) ranged from 7.1% in Germany to 18.2% in the US, which corresponds to ~5.5 million women in the US.Conclusions: Five-year risk predictions from a model with classical risk factors and PRS are well calibrated and provide substantial risk stratification across multiple cohorts in six different countries. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical utility of the validated model for risk stratified screening and prevention of breast cancer

DNA methylation changes measured in pre-diagnostic peripheral blood samples are associated with smoking and lung cancer risk

DNA methylation changes are associated with cigarette smoking. We used the Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450 array to determine whether methylation in DNA from pre-diagnostic, peripheral blood samples is associated with lung cancer risk. We used a case-control study nested within the EPIC-Italy cohort and a study within the MCCS cohort as discovery sets (a total of 552 case-control pairs). We validated the top signals in 429 case-control pairs from another 3 studies. We identified six CpGs for which hypomethylation was associated with lung cancer risk: cg05575921 in the AHRR gene (p-valuepooled  = 4 × 10(-17) ), cg03636183 in the F2RL3 gene (p-valuepooled  = 2 × 10 (- 13) ), cg21566642 and cg05951221 in 2q37.1 (p-valuepooled  = 7 × 10(-16) and 1 × 10(-11) respectively), cg06126421 in 6p21.33 (p-valuepooled  = 2 × 10(-15) ) and cg23387569 in 12q14.1 (p-valuepooled  = 5 × 10(-7) ). For cg05951221 and cg23387569 the strength of association was virtually identical in never and current smokers. For all these CpGs except for cg23387569, the methylation levels were different across smoking categories in controls (p-valuesheterogeneity  ≤ 1.8 x10 (- 7) ), were lowest for current smokers and increased with time since quitting for former smokers. We observed a gain in discrimination between cases and controls measured by the area under the ROC curve of at least 8% (p-values ≥ 0.003) in former smokers by adding methylation at the 6 CpGs into risk prediction models including smoking status and number of pack-years. Our findings provide convincing evidence that smoking and possibly other factors lead to DNA methylation changes measurable in peripheral blood that may improve prediction of lung cancer risk