| 11. |
- Chen, Hongjie, et al.
(författare)
-
Large-scale cross-cancer fine-mapping of the 5p15.33 region reveals multiple independent signals
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Human Genetics and Genomics Advances. - : Cell Press. - 2666-2477. ; 2:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified thousands of cancer risk loci revealing many risk regions shared across multiple cancers. Characterizing the cross-cancer shared genetic basis can increase our understanding of global mechanisms of cancer development. In this study, we collected GWAS summary statistics based on up to 375,468 cancer cases and 530,521 controls for fourteen types of cancer, including breast (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative), colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, glioma, head/neck, lung, melanoma, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, and renal cancer, to characterize the shared genetic basis of cancer risk. We identified thirteen pairs of cancers with statistically significant local genetic correlations across eight distinct genomic regions. Specifically, the 5p15.33 region, harboring the TERT and CLPTM1L genes, showed statistically significant local genetic correlations for multiple cancer pairs. We conducted a cross-cancer fine-mapping of the 5p15.33 region based on eight cancers that showed genome-wide significant associations in this region (ER-negative breast, colorectal, glioma, lung, melanoma, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer). We used an iterative analysis pipeline implementing a subset-based meta-analysis approach based on cancer-specific conditional analyses and identified ten independent cross-cancer associations within this region. For each signal, we conducted cross-cancer fine-mapping to prioritize the most plausible causal variants. Our findings provide a more in-depth understanding of the shared inherited basis across human cancers and expand our knowledge of the 5p15.33 region in carcinogenesis.
|
|
| 12. |
- Bolton, Kelly L., et al.
(författare)
-
Association Between BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations and Survival in Women With Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
- 2012
-
Ingår i: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 1538-3598. ; 307:4, s. 382-390
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Context Approximately 10% of women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) carry deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. A recent article suggested that BRCA2-related EOC was associated with an improved prognosis, but the effect of BRCA1 remains unclear. Objective To characterize the survival of BRCA carriers with EOC compared with noncarriers and to determine whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers show similar survival patterns. Design, Setting, and Participants A pooled analysis of 26 observational studies on the survival of women with ovarian cancer, which included data from 1213 EOC cases with pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1 (n=909) or BRCA2 (n=304) and from 2666 noncarriers recruited and followed up at variable times between 1987 and 2010 (the median year of diagnosis was 1998). Main Outcome Measure Five-year overall mortality. Results The 5-year overall survival was 36% (95% CI, 34%-38%) for noncarriers, 44% (95% CI, 40%-48%) for BRCA1 carriers, and 52% (95% CI, 46%-58%) for BRCA2 carriers. After adjusting for study and year of diagnosis, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers showed a more favorable survival than noncarriers (for BRCA1: hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89; P<.001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.76; P<.001). These survival differences remained after additional adjustment for stage, grade, histology, and age at diagnosis (for BRCA1: HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.84; P<.001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39-0.61; P<.001). The BRCA1 HR estimate was significantly different from the HR estimated in the adjusted model (P for heterogeneity=.003). Conclusion Among patients with invasive EOC, having a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 was associated with improved 5-year overall survival. BRCA2 carriers had the best prognosis. JAMA. 2012;307(4):382-390
|
|
| 13. |
- Mavaddat, Nasim, et al.
(författare)
-
Prediction of Breast Cancer Risk Based on Profiling With Common Genetic Variants
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2105 .- 0027-8874. ; 107:5, s. 036-036
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Data for multiple common susceptibility alleles for breast cancer may be combined to identify women at different levels of breast cancer risk. Such stratification could guide preventive and screening strategies. However, empirical evidence for genetic risk stratification is lacking. Methods: We investigated the value of using 77 breast cancer-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for risk stratification, in a study of 33 673 breast cancer cases and 33 381 control women of European origin. We tested all possible pair-wise multiplicative interactions and constructed a 77-SNP polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast cancer overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Absolute risks of breast cancer by PRS were derived from relative risk estimates and UK incidence and mortality rates. Results: There was no strong evidence for departure from a multiplicative model for any SNP pair. Women in the highest 1% of the PRS had a three-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer compared with women in the middle quintile (odds ratio [OR] = 3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.95 to 3.83). The ORs for ER-positive and ER-negative disease were 3.73 (95% CI = 3.24 to 4.30) and 2.80 (95% CI = 2.26 to 3.46), respectively. Lifetime risk of breast cancer for women in the lowest and highest quintiles of the PRS were 5.2% and 16.6% for a woman without family history, and 8.6% and 24.4% for a woman with a first-degree family history of breast cancer. Conclusions: The PRS stratifies breast cancer risk in women both with and without a family history of breast cancer. The observed level of risk discrimination could inform targeted screening and prevention strategies. Further discrimination may be achievable through combining the PRS with lifestyle/environmental factors, although these were not considered in this report.
|
|
