| 1. |
- Schmit, Stephanie L, et al.
(författare)
-
Novel Common Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Cancer.
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 111:2, s. 146-157
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 42 loci (P < 5 × 10-8) associated with risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Expanded consortium efforts facilitating the discovery of additional susceptibility loci may capture unexplained familial risk.Methods: We conducted a GWAS in European descent CRC cases and control subjects using a discovery-replication design, followed by examination of novel findings in a multiethnic sample (cumulative n = 163 315). In the discovery stage (36 948 case subjects/30 864 control subjects), we identified genetic variants with a minor allele frequency of 1% or greater associated with risk of CRC using logistic regression followed by a fixed-effects inverse variance weighted meta-analysis. All novel independent variants reaching genome-wide statistical significance (two-sided P < 5 × 10-8) were tested for replication in separate European ancestry samples (12 952 case subjects/48 383 control subjects). Next, we examined the generalizability of discovered variants in East Asians, African Americans, and Hispanics (12 085 case subjects/22 083 control subjects). Finally, we examined the contributions of novel risk variants to familial relative risk and examined the prediction capabilities of a polygenic risk score. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: The discovery GWAS identified 11 variants associated with CRC at P < 5 × 10-8, of which nine (at 4q22.2/5p15.33/5p13.1/6p21.31/6p12.1/10q11.23/12q24.21/16q24.1/20q13.13) independently replicated at a P value of less than .05. Multiethnic follow-up supported the generalizability of discovery findings. These results demonstrated a 14.7% increase in familial relative risk explained by common risk alleles from 10.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.9% to 13.7%; known variants) to 11.9% (95% CI = 9.2% to 15.5%; known and novel variants). A polygenic risk score identified 4.3% of the population at an odds ratio for developing CRC of at least 2.0.Conclusions: This study provides insight into the architecture of common genetic variation contributing to CRC etiology and improves risk prediction for individualized screening.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bedard, Annabelle, et al.
(författare)
-
Mobile technology offers novel insights into the control and treatment of allergic rhinitis : The MASK study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0091-6749 .- 1097-6825. ; 144:1, s. 135-143
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Mobile health can be used to generate innovative insights into optimizing treatment to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) control. Objectives: A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 22 countries to complement a pilot study and provide novel information on medication use, disease control, and work productivity in the everyday life of patients with AR. Methods: A mobile phone app (Allergy Diary, which is freely available on Google Play and Apple stores) was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for (1) overall allergic symptoms; (2) nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms; (3) work; and (4) medication use by using a treatment scroll list including all allergy medications (prescribed and over-the-counter) customized for 22 countries. The 4 most common intranasal medications containing intranasal corticosteroids and 8 oral H-1-antihistamines were studied. Results: Nine thousand one hundred twenty-two users filled in 112,054 days of VASs in 2016 and 2017. Assessment of days was informative. Control of days with rhinitis differed between no (best control), single (good control for intranasal corticosteroid-treated days), or multiple (worst control) treatments. Users with the worst control increased the range of treatments being used. The same trend was found for asthma, eye symptoms, and work productivity. Differences between oral H-1-antihistamines were found. Conclusions: This study confirms the usefulness of the Allergy Diary in accessing and assessing behavior in patients with AR. This observational study using a very simple assessment tool (VAS) on a mobile phone had the potential to answer questions previously thought infeasible.
|
|
