Inclusion of biological knowledge in a Bayesian shrinkage model for joint estimation of SNP effects

Polygenic and Network-Based Studies in Risk Identification and Demystification of cancer

INTRODUCTION

Diseases were initially thought to be the consequence of a single gene mutation. Advances in DNA sequencing tools and our understanding of gene behavior have revealed that complex diseases, such as cancer, are the product of genes cooperating with each other and with their environment in orchestrated communication networks. Seeing that the function of individual genes is still used to analyze cancer, the shift to using functionally interacting groups of genes as a new unit of study holds promise for demystifying cancer.

AREAS COVERED

The literature search focused on three types of cancer, namely breast, lung, and prostate, but arguments from other cancers were also included. The aim was to prove that multigene analyses can accurately predict and prognosticate cancer risk, subtype cancer for more personalized and effective treatments, and discover anti-cancer therapies. Computational intelligence is being harnessed to analyze this type of data and is proving indispensable to scientific progress.

EXPERT OPINION

In the future, comprehensive profiling of all kinds of patient data (e.g., serum molecules, environmental exposures) can be used to build universal networks that should help us elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying diseases and provide appropriate preventive measures, ensuring lifelong health and longevity.

Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes

Stratification of women according to their risk of breast cancer based on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could improve screening and prevention strategies. Our aim was to develop PRSs, optimized for prediction of estrogen receptor (ER)-specific disease, from the largest available genome-wide association dataset and to empirically validate the PRSs in prospective studies. The development dataset comprised 94,075 case subjects and 75,017 control subjects of European ancestry from 69 studies, divided into training and validation sets. Samples were genotyped using genome-wide arrays, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected by stepwise regression or lasso penalized regression. The best performing PRSs were validated in an independent test set comprising 11,428 case subjects and 18,323 control subjects from 10 prospective studies and 190,040 women from UK Biobank (3,215 incident breast cancers). For the best PRSs (313 SNPs), the odds ratio for overall disease per 1 standard deviation in ten prospective studies was 1.61 (95%CI: 1.57-1.65) with area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) = 0.630 (95%CI: 0.628-0.651). The lifetime risk of overall breast cancer in the top centile of the PRSs was 32.6%. Compared with women in the middle quintile, those in the highest 1% of risk had 4.37- and 2.78-fold risks, and those in the lowest 1% of risk had 0.16- and 0.27-fold risks, of developing ER-positive and ER-negative disease, respectively. Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that this PRS was well calibrated and predicts disease risk accurately in the tails of the distribution. This PRS is a powerful and reliable predictor of breast cancer risk that may improve breast cancer prevention programs.