| 1. |
- Muller, David C., et al.
(author)
-
Circulating high sensitivity C reactive protein concentrations and risk of lung cancer : nested case-control study within Lung Cancer Cohort Consortium
- 2019
-
In: The BMJ. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 1756-1833 .- 0959-8138. ; 364
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives To conduct a comprehensive analysis of prospectively measured circulating high sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP) concentration and risk of lung cancer overall, by smoking status (never, former, and current smokers), and histological sub-type.Design Nested case-control study.Setting 20 population based cohort studies in Asia, Europe, Australia, and the United States.Participants 5299 patients with incident lung cancer, with individually incidence density matched controls.Exposure Circulating hsCRP concentrations in prediagnostic serum or plasma samples.Main outcome measure Incident lung cancer diagnosis.Results A positive association between circulating hsCRP concentration and the risk of lung cancer for current (odds ratio associated with a doubling in hsCRP concentration 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.13) and former smokers (1.09, 1.04 to 1.14) was observed, but not for never smokers (P<0.01 for interaction). This association was strong and consistent across all histological subtypes, except for adenocarcinoma, which was not strongly associated with hsCRP concentration regardless of smoking status (odds ratio for adenocarcinoma overall 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.01). The association between circulating hsCRP concentration and the risk of lung cancer was strongest in the first two years of follow-up for former and current smokers. Including hsCRP concentration in a risk model, in addition to smoking based variables, did not improve risk discrimination overall, but slightly improved discrimination for cancers diagnosed in the first two years of follow-up.Conclusions Former and current smokers with higher circulating hsCRP concentrations had a higher risk of lung cancer overall. Circulating hsCRP concentration was not associated with the risk of lung adenocarcinoma. Circulating hsCRP concentration could be a prediagnostic marker of lung cancer rather than a causal risk factor.
|
|
| 2. |
- Laskar, Ruhina S, et al.
(author)
-
Sex specific associations in genome wide association analysis of renal cell carcinoma.
- 2019
-
In: European Journal of Human Genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1018-4813 .- 1476-5438. ; 27:10, s. 1589-1598
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has an undisputed genetic component and a stable 2:1 male to female sex ratio in its incidence across populations, suggesting possible sexual dimorphism in its genetic susceptibility. We conducted the first sex-specific genome-wide association analysis of RCC for men (3227 cases, 4916 controls) and women (1992 cases, 3095 controls) of European ancestry from two RCC genome-wide scans and replicated the top findings using an additional series of men (2261 cases, 5852 controls) and women (1399 cases, 1575 controls) from two independent cohorts of European origin. Our study confirmed sex-specific associations for two known RCC risk loci at 14q24.2 (DPF3) and 2p21(EPAS1). We also identified two additional suggestive male-specific loci at 6q24.3 (SAMD5, male odds ratio (ORmale) = 0.83 [95% CI = 0.78-0.89], Pmale = 1.71 × 10-8 compared with female odds ratio (ORfemale) = 0.98 [95% CI = 0.90-1.07], Pfemale = 0.68) and 12q23.3 (intergenic, ORmale = 0.75 [95% CI = 0.68-0.83], Pmale = 1.59 × 10-8 compared with ORfemale = 0.93 [95% CI = 0.82-1.06], Pfemale = 0.21) that attained genome-wide significance in the joint meta-analysis. Herein, we provide evidence of sex-specific associations in RCC genetic susceptibility and advocate the necessity of larger genetic and genomic studies to unravel the endogenous causes of sex bias in sexually dimorphic traits and diseases like RCC.
|
|
| 3. |
- Watts, Eleanor L., et al.
(author)
-
The associations of anthropometric, behavioural and sociodemographic factors with circulating concentrations of IGF‐I, IGF‐II, IGFBP‐1, IGFBP‐2 and IGFBP‐3 in a pooled analysis of 16,024 men from 22 studies
- 2019
-
In: International Journal of Cancer. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 145:12, s. 3244-3256
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Insulin‐like growth factors (IGFs) and insulin‐like growth factor binding proteins (IGFBPs) have been implicated in the aetiology of several cancers. To better understand whether anthropometric, behavioural and sociodemographic factors may play a role in cancer risk via IGF signalling, we examined the cross‐sectional associations of these exposures with circulating concentrations of IGFs (IGF‐I and IGF‐II) and IGFBPs (IGFBP‐1, IGFBP‐2 and IGFBP‐3). The Endogenous Hormones, Nutritional Biomarkers and Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group dataset includes individual participant data from 16,024 male controls (i.e. without prostate cancer) aged 22–89 years from 22 prospective studies. Geometric means of protein concentrations were estimated using analysis of variance, adjusted for relevant covariates. Older age was associated with higher concentrations of IGFBP‐1 and IGFBP‐2 and lower concentrations of IGF‐I, IGF‐II and IGFBP‐3. Higher body mass index was associated with lower concentrations of IGFBP‐1 and IGFBP‐2. Taller height was associated with higher concentrations of IGF‐I and IGFBP‐3 and lower concentrations of IGFBP‐1. Smokers had higher concentrations of IGFBP‐1 and IGFBP‐2 and lower concentrations of IGFBP‐3 than nonsmokers. Higher alcohol consumption was associated with higher concentrations of IGF‐II and lower concentrations of IGF‐I and IGFBP‐2. African Americans had lower concentrations of IGF‐II, IGFBP‐1, IGFBP‐2 and IGFBP‐3 and Hispanics had lower IGF‐I, IGF‐II and IGFBP‐3 than non‐Hispanic whites. These findings indicate that a range of anthropometric, behavioural and sociodemographic factors are associated with circulating concentrations of IGFs and IGFBPs in men, which will lead to a greater understanding of the mechanisms through which these factors influence cancer risk.
|
|
