| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
| 23. |
- Dareng, EO, et al.
(author)
-
Polygenic risk modeling for prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer risk
- 2022
-
In: European journal of human genetics : EJHG. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1476-5438 .- 1018-4813. ; 30:3, s. 349-362
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have the potential to improve risk stratification. Joint estimation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) effects in models could improve predictive performance over standard approaches of PRS construction. Here, we implemented computationally efficient, penalized, logistic regression models (lasso, elastic net, stepwise) to individual level genotype data and a Bayesian framework with continuous shrinkage, “select and shrink for summary statistics” (S4), to summary level data for epithelial non-mucinous ovarian cancer risk prediction. We developed the models in a dataset consisting of 23,564 non-mucinous EOC cases and 40,138 controls participating in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) and validated the best models in three populations of different ancestries: prospective data from 198,101 women of European ancestries; 7,669 women of East Asian ancestries; 1,072 women of African ancestries, and in 18,915 BRCA1 and 12,337 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestries. In the external validation data, the model with the strongest association for non-mucinous EOC risk derived from the OCAC model development data was the S4 model (27,240 SNPs) with odds ratios (OR) of 1.38 (95% CI: 1.28–1.48, AUC: 0.588) per unit standard deviation, in women of European ancestries; 1.14 (95% CI: 1.08–1.19, AUC: 0.538) in women of East Asian ancestries; 1.38 (95% CI: 1.21–1.58, AUC: 0.593) in women of African ancestries; hazard ratios of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.29–1.43, AUC: 0.592) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.35–1.64, AUC: 0.624) in BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Incorporation of the S4 PRS in risk prediction models for ovarian cancer may have clinical utility in ovarian cancer prevention programs.
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
|
|
| 28. |
- Jiang, X, et al.
(author)
-
Circulating vitamin D concentrations and risk of breast and prostate cancer: a Mendelian randomization study
- 2019
-
In: International journal of epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1464-3685 .- 0300-5771. ; 48:5, s. 1416-1424
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundObservational studies have suggested an association between circulating vitamin D concentrations [25(OH)D] and risk of breast and prostate cancer, which was not supported by a recent Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis comprising 15 748 breast and 22 898 prostate-cancer cases. Demonstrating causality has proven challenging and one common limitation of MR studies is insufficient power.MethodsWe aimed to determine whether circulating concentrations of vitamin D are causally associated with the risk of breast and prostate cancer, by using summary-level data from the largest ever genome-wide association studies conducted on vitamin D (N = 73 699), breast cancer (Ncase = 122 977) and prostate cancer (Ncase = 79 148). We constructed a stronger instrument using six common genetic variants (compared with the previous four variants) and applied several two-sample MR methods.ResultsWe found no evidence to support a causal association between 25(OH)D and risk of breast cancer [OR per 25 nmol/L increase, 1.02 (95% confidence interval: 0.97–1.08), P = 0.47], oestrogen receptor (ER)+ [1.00 (0.94–1.07), P = 0.99] or ER− [1.02 (0.90–1.16), P = 0.75] subsets, prostate cancer [1.00 (0.93–1.07), P = 0.99] or the advanced subtype [1.02 (0.90–1.16), P = 0.72] using the inverse-variance-weighted method. Sensitivity analyses did not reveal any sign of directional pleiotropy.ConclusionsDespite its almost five-fold augmented sample size and substantially improved statistical power, our MR analysis does not support a causal effect of circulating 25(OH)D concentrations on breast- or prostate-cancer risk. However, we can still not exclude a modest or non-linear effect of vitamin D. Future studies may be designed to understand the effect of vitamin D in subpopulations with a profound deficiency.
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
