| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Cruz, Raquel, et al.
(författare)
-
Novel genes and sex differences in COVID-19 severity
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Human Molecular Genetics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0964-6906 .- 1460-2083. ; 31:22, s. 3789-3806
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Here, we describe the results of a genome-wide study conducted in 11 939 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) positive cases with an extensive clinical information that were recruited from 34 hospitals across Spain (SCOURGE consortium). In sex-disaggregated genome-wide association studies for COVID-19 hospitalization, genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10−8) was crossed for variants in 3p21.31 and 21q22.11 loci only among males (P = 1.3 × 10−22 and P = 8.1 × 10−12, respectively), and for variants in 9q21.32 near TLE1 only among females (P = 4.4 × 10−8). In a second phase, results were combined with an independent Spanish cohort (1598 COVID-19 cases and 1068 population controls), revealing in the overall analysis two novel risk loci in 9p13.3 and 19q13.12, with fine-mapping prioritized variants functionally associated with AQP3 (P = 2.7 × 10−8) and ARHGAP33 (P = 1.3 × 10−8), respectively. The meta-analysis of both phases with four European studies stratified by sex from the Host Genetics Initiative (HGI) confirmed the association of the 3p21.31 and 21q22.11 loci predominantly in males and replicated a recently reported variant in 11p13 (ELF5, P = 4.1 × 10−8). Six of the COVID-19 HGI discovered loci were replicated and an HGI-based genetic risk score predicted the severity strata in SCOURGE. We also found more SNP-heritability and larger heritability differences by age (<60 or ≥60 years) among males than among females. Parallel genome-wide screening of inbreeding depression in SCOURGE also showed an effect of homozygosity in COVID-19 hospitalization and severity and this effect was stronger among older males. In summary, new candidate genes for COVID-19 severity and evidence supporting genetic disparities among sexes are provided.
|
|
| 3. |
- 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.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
