1
|
Shieh Y, Roger J, Yau C, Wolf DM, Hirst GL, Swigart LB, Huntsman S, Hu D, Nierenberg JL, Middha P, Heise RS, Shi Y, Kachuri L, Zhu Q, Yao S, Ambrosone CB, Kwan ML, Caan BJ, Witte JS, Kushi LH, 't Veer LV, Esserman LJ, Ziv E. Development and testing of a polygenic risk score for breast cancer aggressiveness. NPJ Precis Oncol 2023; 7:42. [PMID: 37188791 PMCID: PMC10185660 DOI: 10.1038/s41698-023-00382-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Aggressive breast cancers portend a poor prognosis, but current polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for breast cancer do not reliably predict aggressive cancers. Aggressiveness can be effectively recapitulated using tumor gene expression profiling. Thus, we sought to develop a PRS for the risk of recurrence score weighted on proliferation (ROR-P), an established prognostic signature. Using 2363 breast cancers with tumor gene expression data and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes, we examined the associations between ROR-P and known breast cancer susceptibility SNPs using linear regression models. We constructed PRSs based on varying p-value thresholds and selected the optimal PRS based on model r2 in 5-fold cross-validation. We then used Cox proportional hazards regression to test the ROR-P PRS's association with breast cancer-specific survival in two independent cohorts totaling 10,196 breast cancers and 785 events. In meta-analysis of these cohorts, higher ROR-P PRS was associated with worse survival, HR per SD = 1.13 (95% CI 1.06-1.21, p = 4.0 × 10-4). The ROR-P PRS had a similar magnitude of effect on survival as a comparator PRS for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative versus positive cancer risk (PRSER-/ER+). Furthermore, its effect was minimally attenuated when adjusted for PRSER-/ER+, suggesting that the ROR-P PRS provides additional prognostic information beyond ER status. In summary, we used integrated analysis of germline SNP and tumor gene expression data to construct a PRS associated with aggressive tumor biology and worse survival. These findings could potentially enhance risk stratification for breast cancer screening and prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiwey Shieh
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Jacquelyn Roger
- PhD Program in Biological and Medical Informatics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Christina Yau
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Denise M Wolf
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Gillian L Hirst
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Lamorna Brown Swigart
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Scott Huntsman
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Donglei Hu
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Jovia L Nierenberg
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Pooja Middha
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Rachel S Heise
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yushu Shi
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Linda Kachuri
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Qianqian Zhu
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Song Yao
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Christine B Ambrosone
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Marilyn L Kwan
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - Bette J Caan
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - John S Witte
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Lawrence H Kushi
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - Laura van 't Veer
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Laura J Esserman
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Elad Ziv
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lakeman IMM, Rodríguez-Girondo MDM, Lee A, Celosse N, Braspenning ME, van Engelen K, van de Beek I, van der Hout AH, Gómez García EB, Mensenkamp AR, Ausems MGEM, Hooning MJ, Adank MA, Hollestelle A, Schmidt MK, van Asperen CJ, Devilee P. Clinical applicability of the Polygenic Risk Score for breast cancer risk prediction in familial cases. J Med Genet 2023; 60:327-336. [PMID: 36137616 DOI: 10.1136/jmg-2022-108502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Common low-risk variants are presently not used to guide clinical management of familial breast cancer (BC). We explored the additive impact of a 313-variant-based Polygenic Risk Score (PRS313) relative to standard gene testing in non-BRCA1/2 Dutch BC families. METHODS We included 3918 BC cases from 3492 Dutch non-BRCA1/2 BC families and 3474 Dutch population controls. The association of the standardised PRS313 with BC was estimated using a logistic regression model, adjusted for pedigree-based family history. Family history of the controls was imputed for this analysis. SEs were corrected to account for relatedness of individuals. Using the BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) V.5 model, lifetime risks were retrospectively calculated with and without individual PRS313. For 2586 cases and 2584 controls, the carrier status of pathogenic variants (PVs) in ATM, CHEK2 and PALB2 was known. RESULTS The family history-adjusted PRS313 was significantly associated with BC (per SD OR=1.97, 95% CI 1.84 to 2.11). Including the PRS313 in BOADICEA family-based risk prediction would have changed screening recommendations in up to 27%, 36% and 34% of cases according to BC screening guidelines from the USA, UK and the Netherlands (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation), respectively. For the population controls, without information on family history, this was up to 39%, 44% and 58%, respectively. Among carriers of PVs in known moderate BC susceptibility genes, the PRS313 had the largest impact for CHEK2 and ATM. CONCLUSIONS Our results support the application of the PRS313 in risk prediction for genetically uninformative BC families and families with a PV in moderate BC risk genes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inge M M Lakeman
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Mar D M Rodríguez-Girondo
- Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Andrew Lee
- Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nandi Celosse
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Merel E Braspenning
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Klaartje van Engelen
- Department of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Irma van de Beek
- Department of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annemiek H van der Hout
- Department of Clinical Genetics, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Encarna B Gómez García
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen R Mensenkamp
- Department of Human Genetics, University Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Margreet G E M Ausems
- Department of Medical Genetics, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Muriel A Adank
- Family Cancer Clinic, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Antoinette Hollestelle
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christi J van Asperen
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tshiaba PT, Ratman DK, Sun JM, Tunstall TS, Levy B, Shah PS, Weitzel JN, Rabinowitz M, Kumar A, Im KM. Integration of a Cross-Ancestry Polygenic Model With Clinical Risk Factors Improves Breast Cancer Risk Stratification. JCO Precis Oncol 2023; 7:e2200447. [PMID: 36809055 DOI: 10.1200/po.22.00447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/23/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop and validate a cross-ancestry integrated risk score (caIRS) that combines a cross-ancestry polygenic risk score (caPRS) with a clinical estimator for breast cancer (BC) risk. We hypothesized that the caIRS is a better predictor of BC risk than clinical risk factors across diverse ancestry groups. METHODS We used diverse retrospective cohort data with longitudinal follow-up to develop a caPRS and integrate it with the Tyrer-Cuzick (T-C) clinical model. We tested the association between the caIRS and BC risk in two validation cohorts including > 130,000 women. We compared model discrimination for 5-year and remaining lifetime BC risk between the caIRS and T-C and assessed how the caIRS would affect screening in the clinic. RESULTS The caIRS outperformed T-C alone for all populations tested in both validation cohorts and contributed significantly to risk prediction beyond T-C. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.57 to 0.65, and the odds ratio per standard deviation increased from 1.35 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.43) to 1.79 (95% CI, 1.70 to 1.88) in validation cohort 1 with similar improvements observed in validation cohort 2. We observed the largest gain in positive predictive value using the caIRS in Black/African American women across both validation cohorts, with an approximately two-fold increase and an equivalent negative predictive value as the T-C. In a multivariate, age-adjusted logistic regression model including both caIRS and T-C, caIRS remained significant, indicating that caIRS provides information over T-C alone. CONCLUSION Adding a caPRS to the T-C model improves BC risk stratification for women of multiple ancestries, which could have implications for screening recommendations and prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Brynn Levy
- MyOme Inc, Menlo Park, CA.,Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ohbe H, Hachiya T, Yamaji T, Nakano S, Miyamoto Y, Sutoh Y, Otsuka-Yamasaki Y, Shimizu A, Yasunaga H, Sawada N, Inoue M, Tsugane S, Iwasaki M. Development and validation of genome-wide polygenic risk scores for predicting breast cancer incidence in Japanese females: a population-based case-cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2023; 197:661-671. [PMID: 36538246 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06843-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2022] [Accepted: 12/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to develop an ancestry-specific polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for the prediction of breast cancer events in Japanese females and validate it in a longitudinal cohort study. METHODS Using publicly available summary statistics of female breast cancer genome-wide association study (GWAS) of Japanese and European ancestries, we, respectively, developed 31 candidate genome-wide PRSs using pruning and thresholding (P + T) and LDpred methods with varying parameters. Among the candidate PRS models, the best model was selected using a case-cohort dataset (63 breast cancer cases and 2213 sub-cohorts of Japanese females during a median follow-up of 11.9 years) according to the maximal predictive ability by Harrell's C-statistics. The best-performing PRS for each derivation GWAS was evaluated in another independent case-cohort dataset (260 breast cancer cases and 7845 sub-cohorts of Japanese females during a median follow-up of 16.9 years). RESULTS For the best PRS model involving 46,861 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; P + T method with PT = 0.05 and R2 = 0.2) derived from Japanese-ancestry GWAS, the Harrell's C-statistic was 0.598 ± 0.018 in the evaluation dataset. The age-adjusted hazard ratio for breast cancer in females with the highest PRS quintile compared with those in the lowest PRS quintile was 2.47 (95% confidence intervals, 1.64-3.70). The PRS constructed using Japanese-ancestry GWAS demonstrated better predictive performance for breast cancer in Japanese females than that using European-ancestry GWAS (Harrell's C-statistics 0.598 versus 0.586). CONCLUSION This study developed a breast cancer PRS for Japanese females and demonstrated the usefulness of the PRS for breast cancer risk stratification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiroyuki Ohbe
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan
| | - Tsuyoshi Hachiya
- Division of Biomedical Information Analysis, Iwate Tohoku Medical Megabank Organization, Iwate Medical University, 1-1-1 Idaidori, Yahaba, Shiwa, Iwate, 028-3694, Japan.
| | - Taiki Yamaji
- Division of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
| | - Shiori Nakano
- Division of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan
| | - Yoshihisa Miyamoto
- Division of Cohort Research, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan
| | - Yoichi Sutoh
- Division of Biomedical Information Analysis, Iwate Tohoku Medical Megabank Organization, Iwate Medical University, 1-1-1 Idaidori, Yahaba, Shiwa, Iwate, 028-3694, Japan
| | - Yayoi Otsuka-Yamasaki
- Division of Biomedical Information Analysis, Iwate Tohoku Medical Megabank Organization, Iwate Medical University, 1-1-1 Idaidori, Yahaba, Shiwa, Iwate, 028-3694, Japan
| | - Atsushi Shimizu
- Division of Biomedical Information Analysis, Iwate Tohoku Medical Megabank Organization, Iwate Medical University, 1-1-1 Idaidori, Yahaba, Shiwa, Iwate, 028-3694, Japan
| | - Hideo Yasunaga
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan
| | - Norie Sawada
- Division of Cohort Research, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan
| | - Manami Inoue
- Division of Cohort Research, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.,Division of Prevention, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan
| | - Shoichiro Tsugane
- Division of Cohort Research, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.,National Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, 162-8636, Japan
| | - Motoki Iwasaki
- Division of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.,Division of Cohort Research, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ge L, Zhu J, Liu J, Li L, Zhang J, Cheng J, Li Y, Yang Z, Li S, He J, Zhang X. METTL1 gene polymorphisms synergistically confer hepatoblastoma susceptibility. Discov Oncol 2022; 13:77. [PMID: 35986847 PMCID: PMC9392666 DOI: 10.1007/s12672-022-00545-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hepatoblastoma is a rare but devastating pediatric liver malignancy. Overexpressed methyltransferase-like 1 (METTL1) is a methyltransferase that catalyzes essential N7-methylguanosine (m7G) modification of eukaryotic mRNA. Accumulating evidence has revealed the oncogenic potential of METTL1. However, whether METTL1 gene polymorphisms confer susceptibility to hepatoblastoma has not been reported. This study aimed to identify causal relationships between genetic variants of this gene and susceptibility to hepatoblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using the TaqMan assay, we genotyped three METTL1 polymorphisms (rs2291617 G > T, rs10877013 T > C, rs10877012 T > G) in germline DNA samples from 1759 Chinese children of Han ethnicity (313 cases vs. 1446 controls). RESULTS None of these polymorphisms were associated with hepatoblastoma risk. However, combination analysis showed that children with 1 to 3 risk genotypes were associated with increased hepatoblastoma risk (adjusted odds ratio = 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.07-2.02; P = 0.018). Stratified analyses revealed significant effects of combined polymorphisms mainly among young children (< 17 months of age), boys, and those with advanced hepatoblastoma. CONCLUSION We identified some potential functional METTL1 gene polymorphisms that work together to increase the risk of hepatoblastoma among Chinese Han children; single polymorphism showed only weak effects. These METTL1 polymorphisms may be promising biomarkers for screening high-risk individuals for hepatoblastoma. These findings are inspiring and deserve to be validated among individuals of different ethnicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lili Ge
- Henan Provincial Key Laboratory of Children's Genetics and Metabolic Diseases, Children's Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Henan Children's Hospital, Zhengzhou Children's Hospital, Zhengzhou, 450018, Henan, China
| | - Jinhong Zhu
- Department of Clinical Laboratory, Biobank, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, 150040, Heilongjiang, China
| | - Jiabin Liu
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Guangzhou Institute of Pediatrics, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Research in Structural Birth Defect Disease, Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou Medical University, 9 Jinsui Road, Guangzhou, 510623, Guangdong, China
| | - Li Li
- Kunming Key Laboratory of Children Infection and Immunity, Yunnan Key Laboratory of Children's Major Disease Research, Yunnan Institute of Pediatrics Research, Yunnan Medical Center for Pediatric Diseases, Kunming Children's Hospital, Kunming, 650228, Yunnan, China
| | - Jiao Zhang
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, China
| | - Jiwen Cheng
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, 710004, Shaanxi, China
| | - Yong Li
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hunan Children's Hospital, Changsha, 410004, Hunan, China
| | - Zhonghua Yang
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China
| | - Suhong Li
- Department of Pathology, Children Hospital and Women Health Center of Shanxi, Taiyuan, 030013, Shannxi, China
| | - Jing He
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Guangzhou Institute of Pediatrics, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Research in Structural Birth Defect Disease, Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou Medical University, 9 Jinsui Road, Guangzhou, 510623, Guangdong, China.
| | - Xianwei Zhang
- Department of Pediatric Oncologic Surgery, Children's Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Henan Children's Hospital, Zhengzhou Children's Hospital, 33 Longhu Waihuan East Road, Zhengzhou, 450018, Henan, China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hou C, Xu B, Hao Y, Yang D, Song H, Li J. Development and validation of polygenic risk scores for prediction of breast cancer and breast cancer subtypes in Chinese women. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:374. [PMID: 35395775 PMCID: PMC8991589 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09425-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2021] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Studies investigating breast cancer polygenic risk score (PRS) in Chinese women are scarce. The objectives of this study were to develop and validate PRSs that could be used to stratify risk for overall and subtype-specific breast cancer in Chinese women, and to evaluate the performance of a newly proposed Artificial Neural Network (ANN) based approach for PRS construction. Methods The PRSs were constructed using the dataset from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) and validated in an independent case-control study. Three approaches, including repeated logistic regression (RLR), logistic ridge regression (LRR) and ANN based approach, were used to build the PRSs for overall and subtype-specific breast cancer based on 24 selected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Predictive performance and calibration of the PRSs were evaluated unadjusted and adjusted for Gail-2 model 5-year risk or classical breast cancer risk factors. Results The primary PRSANN and PRSLRR both showed modest predictive ability for overall breast cancer (odds ratio per interquartile range increase of the PRS in controls [IQ-OR] 1.76 vs 1.58; area under the receiver operator characteristic curve [AUC] 0.601 vs 0.598) and remained to be predictive after adjustment. Although estrogen receptor negative (ER−) breast cancer was poorly predicted by the primary PRSs, the ER− PRSs trained solely on ER− breast cancer cases saw a substantial improvement in predictions of ER− breast cancer. Conclusions The 24 SNPs based PRSs can provide additional risk information to help breast cancer risk stratification in the general population of China. The newly proposed ANN approach for PRS construction has potential to replace the traditional approaches, but more studies are needed to validate and investigate its performance. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09425-3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Can Hou
- West China Biomedical Big Data Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610047, Sichuan, China.,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, No.16 Ren Min Nan Lu, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.,Med-X Center for Informatics, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Bin Xu
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, No.16 Ren Min Nan Lu, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China
| | - Yu Hao
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, No.16 Ren Min Nan Lu, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China
| | - Daowen Yang
- Robot Perception and Control Joint Lab, Sichuan University & Aisono, Chengdu, China
| | - Huan Song
- West China Biomedical Big Data Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610047, Sichuan, China. .,Med-X Center for Informatics, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
| | - Jiayuan Li
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, No.16 Ren Min Nan Lu, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wang X, Xiong M, Pan B, Cho WCS, Zhou J, Wang S, He B. Association Between SNPs in the One-Carbon Metabolism Pathway and the Risk of Female Breast Cancer in a Chinese Population. Pharmgenomics Pers Med 2022; 15:9-16. [PMID: 35046699 PMCID: PMC8761026 DOI: 10.2147/pgpm.s328612] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2021] [Accepted: 11/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study is to assess the relationship between the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the one-carbon metabolism pathway (MTR rs1805087; MTHFR rs1801133; ALDH1L1 rs2002287, rs2276731; DNMT1 rs16999593, rs2228611; DNMT3B rs2424908) and the risk of female breast cancer (BC) in a Chinese population. Methods A population-based case-control study was conducted, involving a total of 439 BC patients and 439 age-matched healthy controls. We adopted Sequence MASSarray to identify genotyping, and used immunohistochemistry (IHC) to test the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) in tumor tissue. Results We found that rs16999593 (TC/CC vs TT: adjusted OR=1.38, 95% CI: 1.03-1.84, p=0.030) was associated with an increased risk of BC, while rs2228611 was related to a decreased BC risk (GA/AA vs GG: adjusted OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.56-0.97, p=0.030). In addition, stratified analysis revealed that DNMT1 rs16999593, rs2228611 and ALDH1L1 rs2002287 contributed to the risk of BC, with associations with ER, PR and HER-2 expression. Conclusion In summary, this study revealed that DNMT1 rs16999593 and rs2228611 were associated with BC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuhong Wang
- School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210096, People's Republic of China.,Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210006, People's Republic of China
| | - Mengqiu Xiong
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210006, People's Republic of China
| | - Bei Pan
- School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210096, People's Republic of China.,Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210006, People's Republic of China
| | - William C S Cho
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China
| | - Jin Zhou
- Department of General Surgery, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Shukui Wang
- School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210096, People's Republic of China.,Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210006, People's Republic of China.,Jiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center on Cancer Personalized Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Bangshun He
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210006, People's Republic of China.,Jiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center on Cancer Personalized Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Park HL, Chang J, Haridass V, Wang SS, Ziogas A, Anton-culver H. Mammography screening and mortality by risk status in the California teachers study. BMC Cancer 2021; 21. [PMID: 34922473 PMCID: PMC8684058 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-09071-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2021] [Accepted: 11/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The debate continues among medical professionals regarding the frequency, starting age, and stopping age for mammography screening. Some experts suggest tailoring recommendations based on individuals’ personal breast cancer risk. Previous studies have not compared the impact of annual versus biennial mammography stratified by age group and risk category. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between mammography frequency and mortality by age group and risk category in the California Teachers Study. Methods Using data from study questionnaires from 93,438 women between the ages of 40 and 85 and linkages to the California Cancer Registry and other indices, overall and breast cancer-specific mortality by mammography frequency were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, stratified by age group and risk category at baseline as determined by the Gail breast cancer risk model. Results During the follow-up period of 20 years, overall mortality risk was lower in women who had annual or biennial mammography compared to less frequent or no mammography in all age groups. Annual mammography was associated with lower overall mortality risk compared to biennial mammography among women age 50–85. This difference was especially apparent in women age 60–74, regardless of estimated Gail risk category at baseline. Breast cancer-specific mortality was lower among women who had annual mammography compared to biennial or less frequent mammography among women age 60–74, regardless of their baseline risk. Conclusions Our findings suggest that at least biennial mammography is beneficial to most women age 40–85 and that annual mammography is more beneficial than biennial mammography to most women age 50–85 in terms of overall mortality. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-09071-1.
Collapse
|
9
|
Wang Y, Zhu M, Ma H, Shen H. Polygenic risk scores: the future of cancer risk prediction, screening, and precision prevention. Med Rev (Berl) 2021; 1:129-149. [PMID: 37724297 PMCID: PMC10471106 DOI: 10.1515/mr-2021-0025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 09/20/2023]
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have shown that the genetic architecture of cancers are highly polygenic and enabled researchers to identify genetic risk loci for cancers. The genetic variants associated with a cancer can be combined into a polygenic risk score (PRS), which captures part of an individual's genetic susceptibility to cancer. Recently, PRSs have been widely used in cancer risk prediction and are shown to be capable of identifying groups of individuals who could benefit from the knowledge of their probabilistic susceptibility to cancer, which leads to an increased interest in understanding the potential utility of PRSs that might further refine the assessment and management of cancer risk. In this context, we provide an overview of the major discoveries from cancer GWASs. We then review the methodologies used for PRS construction, and describe steps for the development and evaluation of risk prediction models that include PRS and/or conventional risk factors. Potential utility of PRSs in cancer risk prediction, screening, and precision prevention are illustrated. Challenges and practical considerations relevant to the implementation of PRSs in health care settings are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuzhuo Wang
- Department of Epidemiology, Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Department of Medical Informatics, School of Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
| | - Meng Zhu
- Department of Epidemiology, Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Jiangsu Key Lab of Cancer Biomarkers, Prevention and Treatment, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Personalized Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
| | - Hongxia Ma
- Department of Epidemiology, Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Jiangsu Key Lab of Cancer Biomarkers, Prevention and Treatment, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Personalized Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Research Units of Cohort Study on Cardiovascular Diseases and Cancers, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Hongbing Shen
- Department of Epidemiology, Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Jiangsu Key Lab of Cancer Biomarkers, Prevention and Treatment, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Personalized Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
- Research Units of Cohort Study on Cardiovascular Diseases and Cancers, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Wang Y, Qiao L, Yang J, Li X, Duan Y, Liu J, Chen S, Li H, Liu D, Fang T, Ma J, Li X, Ye F, Wan J, Wei J, Xu Q, Guo E, Jin P, Wu M, Zhang L, Xia Y, Wu Y, Shao J, Feng Y, Zhang Q, Yang Z, Chen G, Zhang Q, Li X, Wang S, Hu J, Wang X, Tan MP, Takabe K, Kong B, Yang Q, Ma D, Gao Q. Serum semaphorin 4C as a diagnostic biomarker in breast cancer: A multicenter retrospective study. Cancer Commun (Lond) 2021; 41:1373-1386. [PMID: 34738326 PMCID: PMC8696225 DOI: 10.1002/cac2.12233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Revised: 09/28/2021] [Accepted: 10/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To date, there is no approved blood‐based biomarker for breast cancer detection. Herein, we aimed to assess semaphorin 4C (SEMA4C), a pivotal protein involved in breast cancer progression, as a serum diagnostic biomarker. Methods We included 6,213 consecutive inpatients from Tongji Hospital, Qilu Hospital, and Hubei Cancer Hospital. Training cohort and two validation cohorts were introduced for diagnostic exploration and validation. A pan‐cancer cohort was used to independently explore the diagnostic potential of SEMA4C among solid tumors. Breast cancer patients who underwent mass excision prior to modified radical mastectomy were also analyzed. We hypothesized that increased pre‐treatment serum SEMA4C levels, measured using optimized in‐house enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay kits, could detect breast cancer. The endpoints were diagnostic performance, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. Post‐surgery pathological diagnosis was the reference standard and breast cancer staging followed the TNM classification. There was no restriction on disease stage for eligibilities. Results We included 2667 inpatients with breast lesions, 2378 patients with other solid tumors, and 1168 healthy participants. Specifically, 118 patients with breast cancer were diagnosed with stage 0 (5.71%), 620 with stage I (30.00%), 966 with stage II (46.73%), 217 with stage III (10.50%), and 8 with stage IV (0.39%). Patients with breast cancer had significantly higher serum SEMA4C levels than benign breast tumor patients and normal controls (P < 0.001). Elevated serum SEMA4C levels had AUC of 0.920 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.900–0.941) and 0.932 (95%CI: 0.911–0.953) for breast cancer detection in the two validation cohorts. The AUCs for detecting early‐stage breast cancer (n = 366) and ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 85) were 0.931 (95%CI: 0.916–0.946) and 0.879 (95%CI: 0.832–0.925), respectively. Serum SEMA4C levels significantly decreased after surgery, and the reduction was more striking after modified radical mastectomy, compared with mass excision (P < 0.001). The positive rate of enhanced serum SEMA4C levels was 84.77% for breast cancer and below 20.75% for the other 14 solid tumors. Conclusions Serum SEMA4C demonstrated promising potential as a candidate biomarker for breast cancer diagnosis. However, validation in prospective settings and by other study groups is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ya Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Long Qiao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450000, P. R. China
| | - Jie Yang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Xiong Li
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430014, P. R. China
| | - Yaqi Duan
- Department of Pathology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Jiahao Liu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Shaoqi Chen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wuhan Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430022, P. R. China
| | - Huayi Li
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Dan Liu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Tian Fang
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Jingjing Ma
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Xiaoting Li
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Fei Ye
- Department of Neurosurgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Junxiang Wan
- Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, 90001, USA
| | - Juncheng Wei
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Qin Xu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Ensong Guo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Ping Jin
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Mingfu Wu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Lin Zhang
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Yun Xia
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Yaqun Wu
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Jun Shao
- Department of Breast Surgery, Hubei Cancer Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei, 430079, P. R. China
| | - Yaojun Feng
- Department of Breast Surgery, Hubei Cancer Hospital, Wuhan, Hubei, 430079, P. R. China
| | - Qing Zhang
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P. R. China
| | - Zongyuan Yang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Gang Chen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Qinghua Zhang
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430014, P. R. China
| | - Xingrui Li
- Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Shixuan Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Junbo Hu
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Xiaoyun Wang
- Yidu Cloud (Beijing) Technology Co., Beijing, 100000, P. R. China
| | - Mona P Tan
- MammoCare, The Breast Clinic & Surgery, Singapore, 329563, Singapore
| | - Kazuaki Takabe
- Department of Surgery and the Massey Cancer Centre, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia, 23298, USA
| | - Beihua Kong
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P. R. China
| | - Qifeng Yang
- Department of Breast Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, No.107, Jinan Culture Road, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P. R. China
| | - Ding Ma
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| | - Qinglei Gao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China.,Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, P. R. China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Du Z, Gao G, Adedokun B, Ahearn T, Lunetta KL, Zirpoli G, Troester MA, Ruiz-Narváez EA, Haddad SA, PalChoudhury P, Figueroa J, John EM, Bernstein L, Zheng W, Hu JJ, Ziegler RG, Nyante S, Bandera EV, Ingles SA, Mancuso N, Press MF, Deming SL, Rodriguez-Gil JL, Yao S, Ogundiran TO, Ojengbe O, Bolla MK, Dennis J, Dunning AM, Easton DF, Michailidou K, Pharoah PDP, Sandler DP, Taylor JA, Wang Q, Weinberg CR, Kitahara CM, Blot W, Nathanson KL, Hennis A, Nemesure B, Ambs S, Sucheston-Campbell LE, Bensen JT, Chanock SJ, Olshan AF, Ambrosone CB, Olopade OI, Yarney J, Awuah B, Wiafe-Addai B, Conti DV, Palmer JR, Garcia-Closas M, Huo D, Haiman CA. Evaluating Polygenic Risk Scores for Breast Cancer in Women of African Ancestry. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113:1168-1176. [PMID: 33769540 PMCID: PMC8418423 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djab050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2020] [Revised: 02/03/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have been demonstrated to identify women of European, Asian, and Latino ancestry at elevated risk of developing breast cancer (BC). We evaluated the performance of existing PRSs trained in European ancestry populations among women of African ancestry. METHODS We assembled genotype data for women of African ancestry, including 9241 case subjects and 10 193 control subjects. We evaluated associations of 179- and 313-variant PRSs with overall and subtype-specific BC risk. PRS discriminatory accuracy was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. We also evaluated a recalibrated PRS, replacing the index variant with variants in each region that better captured risk in women of African ancestry and estimated lifetime absolute risk of BC in African Americans by PRS category. RESULTS For overall BC, the odds ratio per SD of the 313-variant PRS (PRS313) was 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.571 (95% CI = 0.562 to 0.579). Compared with women with average risk (40th-60th PRS percentile), women in the top decile of PRS313 had a 1.54-fold increased risk (95% CI = 1.38-fold to 1.72-fold). By age 85 years, the absolute risk of overall BC was 19.6% for African American women in the top 1% of PRS313 and 6.7% for those in the lowest 1%. The recalibrated PRS did not improve BC risk prediction. CONCLUSION The PRSs stratify BC risk in women of African ancestry, with attenuated performance compared with that reported in European, Asian, and Latina populations. Future work is needed to improve BC risk stratification for women of African ancestry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhaohui Du
- Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Guimin Gao
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Babatunde Adedokun
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Thomas Ahearn
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | - Gary Zirpoli
- Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Melissa A Troester
- Department of Epidemiology, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | | | - Parichoy PalChoudhury
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jonine Figueroa
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh, UK
- Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Esther M John
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Medicine (Oncology), Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Leslie Bernstein
- Division of Biomarkers of Early Detection and Prevention Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jennifer J Hu
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Regina G Ziegler
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Sarah Nyante
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Elisa V Bandera
- Department of Population Science, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Sue A Ingles
- Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Nicholas Mancuso
- Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Michael F Press
- Department of Pathology, Keck School of Medicine and Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Sandra L Deming
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jorge L Rodriguez-Gil
- Genomics, Development and Disease Section, Genetic Disease Research Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
- Medical Scientist Training Program, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Song Yao
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Temidayo O Ogundiran
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria
| | - Oladosu Ojengbe
- Center for Population and Reproductive Health, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Joe Dennis
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alison M Dunning
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Kyriaki Michailidou
- Biostatistics Unit, The Cyprus Institute of Neurology and Genetics, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Dale P Sandler
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jack A Taylor
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Qin Wang
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Clarice R Weinberg
- Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Cari M Kitahara
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - William Blot
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
- International Epidemiology Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Katherine L Nathanson
- Department of Medicine, Abramson Cancer Center, The Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Anselm Hennis
- Chronic Disease Research Centre and Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of the West Indies, Bridgetown, Barbados
| | - Barbara Nemesure
- Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA
| | - Stefan Ambs
- Laboratory of Human Carcinogenesis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Lara E Sucheston-Campbell
- College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
- College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jeannette T Bensen
- Department of Epidemiology, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Stephen J Chanock
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Andrew F Olshan
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Christine B Ambrosone
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Olufunmilayo I Olopade
- Department of Medicine, Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Julie R Palmer
- Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Montserrat Garcia-Closas
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Dezheng Huo
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Huilgol YS, Keane H, Shieh Y, Hiatt RA, Tice JA, Madlensky L, Sabacan L, Fiscalini AS, Ziv E, Acerbi I, Che M, Anton-Culver H, Borowsky AD, Hunt S, Naeim A, Parker BA, van 't Veer LJ, Esserman LJ. Elevated risk thresholds predict endocrine risk-reducing medication use in the Athena screening registry. NPJ Breast Cancer 2021; 7:102. [PMID: 34344894 PMCID: PMC8333106 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-021-00306-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Risk-reducing endocrine therapy use, though the benefit is validated, is extremely low. The FDA has approved tamoxifen and raloxifene for a 5-year Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) risk ≥ 1.67%. We examined the threshold at which high-risk women are likely to be using endocrine risk-reducing therapies among Athena Breast Health Network participants from 2011-2018. We identified high-risk women by a 5-year BCRAT risk ≥ 1.67% and those in the top 10% and 2.5% risk thresholds by age. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) of current medication use based on these thresholds using logistic regression. One thousand two hundred and one (1.2%) of 104,223 total participants used medication. Of the 33,082 participants with 5-year BCRAT risk ≥ 1.67%, 772 (2.3%) used medication. Of 2445 in the top 2.5% threshold, 209 (8.6%) used medication. Participants whose 5-year risk exceeded 1.67% were more likely to use medication than those whose risk was below this threshold, OR 3.94 (95% CI = 3.50-4.43). The top 2.5% was most strongly associated with medication usage, OR 9.50 (8.13-11.09) compared to the bottom 97.5%. Women exceeding a 5-year BCRAT ≥ 1.67% had modest medication use. We demonstrate that women in the top 2.5% have higher odds of medication use than those in the bottom 97.5% and compared to a risk of 1.67%. The top 2.5% threshold would more effectively target medication use and is being tested prospectively in a randomized control clinical trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yash S Huilgol
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
| | - Holly Keane
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Yiwey Shieh
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Robert A Hiatt
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Tice
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Leah Sabacan
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Elad Ziv
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Irene Acerbi
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Mandy Che
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Arash Naeim
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | | | - Laura J Esserman
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kurian AW, Hughes E, Simmons T, Bernhisel R, Probst B, Meek S, Caswell-Jin JL, John EM, Lanchbury JS, Slavin TP, Wagner S, Gutin A, Rohan TE, Shadyab AH, Manson JE, Lane D, Chlebowski RT, Stefanick ML. Performance of the IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model of breast cancer risk by race and ethnicity in the Women's Health Initiative. Cancer 2021; 127:3742-3750. [PMID: 34228814 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Revised: 05/28/2021] [Accepted: 06/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model is used clinically to guide breast cancer screening and prevention, but was developed primarily in non-Hispanic White women. Little is known about its long-term performance in a racially/ethnically diverse population. METHODS The Women's Health Initiative study enrolled postmenopausal women from 1993-1998. Women were included who were aged <80 years at enrollment with no prior breast cancer or mastectomy and with data required for IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick calculation (weight; height; ages at menarche, first birth, and menopause; menopausal hormone therapy use; and family history of breast or ovarian cancer). Calibration was assessed by the ratio of observed breast cancer cases to the number expected by the IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model (O/E; calculated as the sum of cumulative hazards). Differential discrimination was tested for by self-reported race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander, and American Indian or Alaskan Native) using Cox regression. Exploratory analyses, including simulation of a protective single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), rs140068132 at 6q25, were performed. RESULTS During follow-up (median 18.9 years, maximum 23.4 years), 6783 breast cancer cases occurred among 90,967 women. IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick was well calibrated overall (O/E ratio = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97) and in most racial/ethnic groups, but overestimated risk for Hispanic women (O/E ratio = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90). Discrimination did not differ by race/ethnicity. Exploratory simulation of the protective SNP suggested improved IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick calibration for Hispanic women (O/E ratio = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.96). CONCLUSIONS The IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model is well calibrated for several racial/ethnic groups over 2 decades of follow-up. Studies that incorporate genetic and other risk factors, particularly among Hispanic women, are essential to improve breast cancer-risk prediction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison W Kurian
- Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.,Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Esther M John
- Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | | | | | | | | | - Thomas E Rohan
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York
| | - Aladdin H Shadyab
- Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
| | - JoAnn E Manson
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Dorothy Lane
- Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York
| | - Rowan T Chlebowski
- Department of Medicine, Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California
| | - Marcia L Stefanick
- Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Woodward ER, van Veen EM, Evans DG. From BRCA1 to Polygenic Risk Scores: Mutation-Associated Risks in Breast Cancer-Related Genes. Breast Care (Basel) 2021; 16:202-213. [PMID: 34248461 DOI: 10.1159/000515319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background There has been huge progress over the last 30 years in identifying the familial component of breast cancer. Summary Currently around 20% is explained by the high-risk genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, a further 2% by other high-penetrance genes, and around 5% by the moderate risk genes ATM and CHEK2. In contrast, the more than 300 low-penetrance single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) now account for around 28% and they are predicted to account for most of the remaining 45% yet to be found. Even for high-risk genes which confer a 40-90% risk of breast cancer, these SNP can substantially affect the level of breast cancer risk. Indeed, the strength of family history and hormonal and reproductive factors is very important in assessing risk even for a BRCA carrier. The risks of contralateral breast cancer are also affected by SNP as well as by the presence of high or moderate risk genes. Genetic testing using gene panels is now commonplace. Key-Messages There is a need for a more parsimonious approach to panels only testing those genes with a definite 2-fold increased risk and only testing those genes with challenging management implications, such as CDH1 and TP53, when there is strong clinical indication to do so. Testing of SNP alongside genes is likely to provide a more accurate risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma R Woodward
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Elke M van Veen
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - D Gareth Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.,PREVENT Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, Nightingale Centre, Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, The Christie, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Abstract
Accurate and individualized breast cancer risk assessment can be used to guide personalized screening and prevention recommendations. Existing risk prediction models use genetic and nongenetic risk factors to provide an estimate of a woman's breast cancer risk and/or the likelihood that she has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Each model is best suited for specific clinical scenarios and may have limited applicability in certain types of patients. For example, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, which identifies women who would benefit from chemoprevention, is readily accessible and user-friendly but cannot be used in women under 35 years of age or those with prior breast cancer or lobular carcinoma in situ. Emerging research on deep learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) models suggests that mammographic images contain risk indicators that could be used to strengthen existing risk prediction models. This article reviews breast cancer risk factors, describes the appropriate use, strengths, and limitations of each risk prediction model, and discusses the emerging role of AI for risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geunwon Kim
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Manisha Bahl
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiology, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Abstract
Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have been consistently associated with elevated breast cancer risk in cohort studies and are associated with risk in both women with and those without a family history of breast cancer. However, before clinical implementation, several issues must be addressed, including understanding the potential clinical utility and optimal method to communicate personalized screening recommendations that incorporate the PRS. Several trials are under way to answer some of these questions and facilitate clinical implementation. Because these PRSs have been developed in women of European ancestry, it is important to understand the limitations of their predictive ability in other ancestral groups. Finally, the value of the PRS will lie in considering it along with other clinical, familial, and rare genetic factors that are currently used in personalized risk assessment of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nur Zeinomar
- Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York (N.Z.)
| | - Wendy K Chung
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, New York (W.K.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Cao S, Zhu Z, Zhou J, Li W, Dong Y, Qian Y, Wei P, Wu M. Associations of one-carbon metabolism-related gene polymorphisms with breast cancer risk are modulated by diet, being higher when adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern is low. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021; 187:793-804. [PMID: 33599865 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-021-06108-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2020] [Accepted: 01/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Breast cancer is more likely attributed to a combination of genetic variations and lifestyle factors. Both one-carbon metabolism and diet-related factors could interfere with the carcinogenesis of breast cancer (BC), but whether diet consumed underlie a specific metabolism pathway could influence the impact of genetic variants on breast cancer risk remains equivocal. METHODS A case-control study of the Chinese female population (818 cases, 935 controls). 13 SNPs in eight one-carbon metabolism-related genes (MTHFD1, TYMS, MTRR, MAT2B, CDO1, FOLR1, UNG2, ADA) were performed. Diet was assessed by a validated food-frequency questionnaire. We examined the associations of the adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern (MDP) and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of one-carbon metabolism with breast cancer risk. We constructed an aggregate polygenic risk score (PRS) to test the additive effects of genetic variants and analyzed the gene-diet interactions. RESULTS High adherence (highest quartile) to the MDP decreased the risk of breast cancer among post- but not premenopausal women, respectively (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.78 and 0.90, 0.53 to 1.53). Neither of the polymorphisms or haplotypes was associated with breast cancer risk, irrespective of menopause. However, a high PRS (highest quartile) was associated with more than a doubling risk in both post- and premenopausal women, respectively (OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.32 to 2.87 and 2.09, 1.54 to 2.85). We found a gene-diet interaction with adherence to the MDP for aggregate PRS (P-interaction = 0.000) among postmenopausal women. When adherence to the MDP was low (< median), carries with high PRS (highest quartile) had higher BC risk (OR = 2.80, 95% CI = 1.55 to 5.07) than low PRS (lowest quartile), while adherence to the MDP was high (≥ median), the association disappeared (OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 0.92 to 2.66). CONCLUSION High adherence to the MDP may counteract the genetic predisposition associated with one-carbon metabolism on breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women.
Collapse
|
18
|
Hughes E, Tshiaba P, Wagner S, Judkins T, Rosenthal E, Roa B, Gallagher S, Meek S, Dalton K, Hedegard W, Adami CA, Grear DF, Domchek SM, Garber J, Lancaster JM, Weitzel JN, Kurian AW, Lanchbury JS, Gutin A, Robson ME. Integrating Clinical and Polygenic Factors to Predict Breast Cancer Risk in Women Undergoing Genetic Testing. JCO Precis Oncol 2021; 5:PO.20.00246. [PMID: 34036224 PMCID: PMC8140787 DOI: 10.1200/po.20.00246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2020] [Revised: 09/30/2020] [Accepted: 12/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Screening and prevention decisions for women at increased risk of developing breast cancer depend on genetic and clinical factors to estimate risk and select appropriate interventions. Integration of polygenic risk into clinical breast cancer risk estimators can improve discrimination. However, correlated genetic effects must be incorporated carefully to avoid overestimation of risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS A novel Fixed-Stratified method was developed that accounts for confounding when adding a new factor to an established risk model. A combined risk score (CRS) of an 86-single-nucleotide polymorphism polygenic risk score and the Tyrer-Cuzick v7.02 clinical risk estimator was generated with attenuation for confounding by family history. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of the CRS were evaluated in two independent validation cohorts of women of European ancestry (N = 1,615 and N = 518). Discrimination for remaining lifetime risk was examined by age-adjusted logistic regression. Risk stratification with a 20% risk threshold was compared between CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick in an independent clinical cohort (N = 32,576). RESULTS Simulation studies confirmed that the Fixed-Stratified method produced accurate risk estimation across patients with different family history. In both validation studies, CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick were significantly associated with breast cancer. In an analysis with both CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick as predictors of breast cancer, CRS added significant discrimination independent of that captured by Tyrer-Cuzick (P < 10-11 in validation 1; P < 10-7 in validation 2). In an independent cohort, 18% of women shifted breast cancer risk categories from their Tyrer-Cuzick-based risk compared with risk estimates by CRS. CONCLUSION Integrating clinical and polygenic factors into a risk model offers more effective risk stratification and supports a personalized genomic approach to breast cancer screening and prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Danna F. Grear
- The Breast Center of NWA-Medical Associates of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
| | - Susan M. Domchek
- Basser Center for BRCA, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Shieh Y, Fejerman L, Lott PC, Marker K, Sawyer SD, Hu D, Huntsman S, Torres J, Echeverry M, Bohórquez ME, Martínez-Chéquer JC, Polanco-Echeverry G, Estrada-Flórez AP, Haiman CA, John EM, Kushi LH, Torres-Mejía G, Vidaurre T, Weitzel JN, Zambrano SC, Carvajal-Carmona LG, Ziv E, Neuhausen SL. A Polygenic Risk Score for Breast Cancer in US Latinas and Latin American Women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 112:590-598. [PMID: 31553449 PMCID: PMC7301155 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2019] [Revised: 07/23/2019] [Accepted: 09/04/2019] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Background More than 180 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer susceptibility have been identified; these SNPs can be combined into polygenic risk scores (PRS) to predict breast cancer risk. Because most SNPs were identified in predominantly European populations, little is known about the performance of PRS in non-Europeans. We tested the performance of a 180-SNP PRS in Latinas, a large ethnic group with variable levels of Indigenous American, European, and African ancestry. Methods We conducted a pooled case-control analysis of US Latinas and Latin American women (4658 cases and 7622 controls). We constructed a 180-SNP PRS consisting of SNPs associated with breast cancer risk (P < 5 × 10–8). We evaluated the association between the PRS and breast cancer risk using multivariable logistic regression, and assessed discrimination using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. We also assessed PRS performance across quartiles of Indigenous American genetic ancestry. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Of 180 SNPs tested, 142 showed directionally consistent associations compared with European populations, and 39 were nominally statistically significant (P < .05). The PRS was associated with breast cancer risk, with an odds ratio per SD increment of 1.58 (95% confidence interval [CI = 1.52 to 1.64) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.63 (95% CI = 0.62 to 0.64). The discrimination of the PRS was similar between the top and bottom quartiles of Indigenous American ancestry. Conclusions The 180-SNP PRS predicts breast cancer risk in Latinas, with similar performance as reported for Europeans. The performance of the PRS did not vary substantially according to Indigenous American ancestry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiwey Shieh
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Laura Fejerman
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Paul C Lott
- UC Davis Genome Center, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
| | - Katie Marker
- School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley; Berkeley, CA
| | | | - Donglei Hu
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Scott Huntsman
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Javier Torres
- Unidad de Investigación en Enfermedades Infecciosas, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Magdalena Echeverry
- Grupo de Citogenética, Filogenia y Evolución de Poblaciones, Facultades de Ciencias y Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia
| | - Mabel E Bohórquez
- Grupo de Citogenética, Filogenia y Evolución de Poblaciones, Facultades de Ciencias y Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia
| | | | | | - Ana P Estrada-Flórez
- UC Davis Genome Center, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA.,Grupo de Citogenética, Filogenia y Evolución de Poblaciones, Facultades de Ciencias y Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia
| | | | - Christopher A Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Esther M John
- Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.,Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | - Lawrence H Kushi
- UC Davis Genome Center, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA.,Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA
| | | | | | - Jeffrey N Weitzel
- Division of Clinical Genetics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA
| | | | - Luis G Carvajal-Carmona
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA.,Population Science and Health Disparities Program, University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA
| | - Elad Ziv
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Susan L Neuhausen
- Department of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Duarte, CA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Abstract
Breast cancer screening is a recognized tool for early detection of the disease in asymptomatic women, improving treatment efficacy and reducing the mortality rate. There is raised awareness that a "one-size-fits-all" approach cannot be applied for breast cancer screening. Currently, despite specific guidelines for a minority of women who are at very high risk of breast cancer, all other women are still treated alike. This article reviews the current recommendations for breast cancer risk assessment and breast cancer screening in average-risk and higher-than-average-risk women. Also discussed are new developments and future perspectives for personalized breast cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina Rossi Saccarelli
- Breast Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA; Department of Radiology, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, Rua Dona Adma Jafet 91, São Paulo, SP 01308-050, Brazil
| | - Almir G V Bitencourt
- Breast Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA; Department of Imaging, A.C. Camargo Cancer Center, Rua Prof. Antônio Prudente, 211, São Paulo, SP 01509-010, Brazil
| | - Elizabeth A Morris
- Breast Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kim JO, Schaid DJ, Vachon CM, Cooke A, Couch FJ, Kim CA, Sinnwell JP, Hasadsri L, Stan DL, Goldenberg B, Neal L, Grenier D, Degnim AC, Thicke LA, Pruthi S. Impact of Personalized Genetic Breast Cancer Risk Estimation With Polygenic Risk Scores on Preventive Endocrine Therapy Intention and Uptake. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2020; 14:175-184. [PMID: 33097489 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-20-0154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2020] [Revised: 08/06/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Endocrine therapy is underutilized to reduce breast cancer incidence among women at increased risk. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) assessing 77 breast cancer genetic susceptibility loci personalizes risk estimates. We examined effect of personalized PRS breast cancer risk prediction on intention to take and endocrine therapy uptake among women at increased risk. Eligible participants had a 10-year breast cancer risk ≥5% by Tyrer-Cuzick model [International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS)] or ≥3.0 % 5-year Gail Model risk with no breast cancer history or hereditary breast cancer syndrome. Breast cancer risk was estimated, endocrine therapy options were discussed, and endocrine therapy intent was assessed at baseline. After genotyping, PRS-updated breast cancer risk estimates, endocrine therapy options, and intent to take endocrine therapy were reassessed; endocrine therapy uptake was assessed during follow-up. From March 2016 to October 2017, 151 patients were enrolled [median (range) age, 56.1 (36.0-76.4 years)]. Median 10-year and lifetime IBIS risks were 7.9% and 25.3%. Inclusion of PRS increased lifetime IBIS breast cancer risk estimates for 81 patients (53.6%) and reduced risk for 70 (46.4%). Of participants with increased breast cancer risk by PRS, 39 (41.9%) had greater intent to take endocrine therapy; of those with decreased breast cancer risk by PRS, 28 (46.7%) had less intent to take endocrine therapy (P < 0.001). On multivariable regression, increased breast cancer risk by PRS was associated with greater intent to take endocrine therapy (P < 0.001). Endocrine therapy uptake was greater among participants with increased breast cancer risk by PRS (53.4%) than with decreased risk (20.9%; P < 0.001). PRS testing influenced intent to take and endocrine therapy uptake. Assessing PRS effect on endocrine therapy adherence is needed.Prevention Relevance: Counseling women at increased breast cancer risk using polygenic risk score (PRS) risk estimates can significantly impact preventive endocrine therapy uptake. Further development of PRS testing to personalize breast cancer risk assessments and endocrine therapy counselling may serve to potentially reduce the incidence of breast cancer in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julian O Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.,Research Institute in Oncology and Hematology, CancerCare Manitoba, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Daniel J Schaid
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Celine M Vachon
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Andrew Cooke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Fergus J Couch
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Christina A Kim
- Department of Medical Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Jason P Sinnwell
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Linda Hasadsri
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Daniela L Stan
- Breast Diagnostic Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Benjamin Goldenberg
- Department of Medical Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Lonzetta Neal
- Breast Diagnostic Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Debjani Grenier
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Medical Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Amy C Degnim
- Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Lori A Thicke
- Breast Diagnostic Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sandhya Pruthi
- Breast Diagnostic Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. .,Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Pal Choudhury P, Wilcox AN, Brook MN, Zhang Y, Ahearn T, Orr N, Coulson P, Schoemaker MJ, Jones ME, Gail MH, Swerdlow AJ, Chatterjee N, Garcia-Closas M. Comparative Validation of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models and Projections for Future Risk Stratification. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:278-285. [PMID: 31165158 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2018] [Revised: 01/31/2019] [Accepted: 05/29/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND External validation of risk models is critical for risk-stratified breast cancer prevention. We used the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimation (iCARE) as a flexible tool for risk model development and comparative model validation and to make projections for population risk stratification. METHODS Performance of two recently developed models, one based on the Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium analysis (iCARE-BPC3) and another based on a literature review (iCARE-Lit), were compared with two established models (Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool and International Breast Cancer Intervention Study Model) based on classical risk factors in a UK-based cohort of 64 874 white non-Hispanic women (863 patients) age 35-74 years. Risk projections in a target population of US white non-Hispanic women age 50-70 years assessed potential improvements in risk stratification by adding mammographic breast density (MD) and polygenic risk score (PRS). RESULTS The best calibrated models were iCARE-Lit (expected to observed number of cases [E/O] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.11) for women younger than 50 years, and iCARE-BPC3 (E/O = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.09) for women 50 years or older. Risk projections using iCARE-BPC3 indicated classical risk factors can identify approximately 500 000 women at moderate to high risk (>3% 5-year risk) in the target population. Addition of MD and a 313-variant PRS is expected to increase this number to approximately 3.5 million women, and among them, approximately 153 000 are expected to develop invasive breast cancer within 5 years. CONCLUSIONS iCARE models based on classical risk factors perform similarly to or better than BCRAT or IBIS in white non-Hispanic women. Addition of MD and PRS can lead to substantial improvements in risk stratification. However, these integrated models require independent prospective validation before broad clinical applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amber N Wilcox
- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda
| | | | - Yan Zhang
- Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health
| | - Thomas Ahearn
- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda
| | - Nick Orr
- Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health.,Department of Oncology, School of Medicine.,Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.,Centre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | | | | | | | - Mitchell H Gail
- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda
| | - Anthony J Swerdlow
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology.,Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | | | - Montserrat Garcia-Closas
- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Arthur RS, Wang T, Xue X, Kamensky V, Rohan TE. Genetic Factors, Adherence to Healthy Lifestyle Behavior, and Risk of Invasive Breast Cancer Among Women in the UK Biobank. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:893-901. [PMID: 31899501 PMCID: PMC7492765 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2019] [Revised: 11/01/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer is considered to result from a combination of genetic and lifestyle-related factors, but the degree to which an overall healthy lifestyle may attenuate the impact of multiple genetic variants on invasive breast cancer risk remains equivocal. METHODS Using Cox proportional hazards regression models, we examined the association of a modified healthy lifestyle index (HLI) with risk of invasive breast cancer by genetic risk group among 146 326 women from the UK Biobank. We generated an HLI score based on a combination of diet, physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption and anthropometry, and a polygenic risk score (PRS) using 304 breast cancer-associated genetic loci. RESULTS Among premenopausal and postmenopausal women, a favorable lifestyle (highest tertile) was associated with 22% and 31% reductions in invasive breast cancer risk, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]high vs low = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.64 to 0.94; HRhigh vs low = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.77, respectively), whereas a high PRS (highest tertile) was associated with more than a doubling in the risk in both groups. For premenopausal women, the greatest risk reduction in association with the HLI was seen among those with a high PRS (HRhigh vs low = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.95). In postmenopausal women, those with a favorable lifestyle had 30%, 29%, and 32% reductions in risk of invasive breast cancer in the low, intermediate, and high PRS groups, respectively (HRhigh vs low = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.56 to 0.88; HRhigh vs low = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.84; and HRhigh vs low = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.78, respectively). There was an additive but not multiplicative interaction between the HLI score and PRS for postmenopausal and, to a lesser extent, premenopausal women. CONCLUSION Our findings support the view that an overall healthy lifestyle may attenuate the impact of genetic factors on invasive breast cancer risk among women of European ancestry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tao Wang
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Xiaonan Xue
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
Despite decades of laboratory, epidemiological and clinical research, breast cancer incidence continues to rise. Breast cancer remains the leading cancer-related cause of disease burden for women, affecting one in 20 globally and as many as one in eight in high-income countries. Reducing breast cancer incidence will likely require both a population-based approach of reducing exposure to modifiable risk factors and a precision-prevention approach of identifying women at increased risk and targeting them for specific interventions, such as risk-reducing medication. We already have the capacity to estimate an individual woman's breast cancer risk using validated risk assessment models, and the accuracy of these models is likely to continue to improve over time, particularly with inclusion of newer risk factors, such as polygenic risk and mammographic density. Evidence-based risk-reducing medications are cheap, widely available and recommended by professional health bodies; however, widespread implementation of these has proven challenging. The barriers to uptake of, and adherence to, current medications will need to be considered as we deepen our understanding of breast cancer initiation and begin developing and testing novel preventives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kara L Britt
- Breast Cancer Risk and Prevention Laboratory, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
- The Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Kelly-Anne Phillips
- The Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Gallagher S, Hughes E, Wagner S, Tshiaba P, Rosenthal E, Roa BB, Kurian AW, Domchek SM, Garber J, Lancaster J, Weitzel JN, Gutin A, Lanchbury JS, Robson M. Association of a Polygenic Risk Score With Breast Cancer Among Women Carriers of High- and Moderate-Risk Breast Cancer Genes. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3:e208501. [PMID: 32609350 PMCID: PMC7330720 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.8501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2019] [Accepted: 03/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Importance To date, few studies have examined the extent to which polygenic single-nucleotide variation (SNV) (formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism) scores modify risk for carriers of pathogenic variants (PVs) in breast cancer susceptibility genes. In previous reports, polygenic risk modification was reduced for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers compared with noncarriers, but limited information is available for carriers of CHEK2, ATM, or PALB2 PVs. Objective To examine an 86-SNV polygenic risk score (PRS) for BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PV carriers. Design, Setting, and Participants A retrospective case-control study using data on 150 962 women tested with a multigene hereditary cancer panel between July 19, 2016, and January 11, 2019, was conducted in a commercial testing laboratory. Participants included women of European ancestry between the ages of 18 and 84 years. Main Outcomes and Measures Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of the 86-SNV score with invasive breast cancer after adjusting for age, ancestry, and personal and/or family cancer history. Effect sizes, expressed as standardized odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs, were assessed for carriers of PVs in each gene as well as for noncarriers. Results The median age at hereditary cancer testing of the population was 48 years (range, 18-84 years); there were 141 160 noncarriers in addition to carriers of BRCA1 (n = 2249), BRCA2 (n = 2638), CHEK2 (n = 2564), ATM (n = 1445), and PALB2 (n = 906) PVs included in the analysis. The 86-SNV score was associated with breast cancer risk in each of the carrier populations (P < 1 × 10-4). Stratification was more pronounced for noncarriers (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.45-1.49) and CHEK2 PV carriers (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.36-1.64) than for carriers of BRCA1 (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.32) or BRCA2 (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34) PVs. Odds ratios for ATM (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.55) and PALB2 (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.16-1.55) PV carrier populations were intermediate between those for BRCA1/2 and CHEK2 noncarriers. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, the 86-SNV score was associated with modified risk for carriers of BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PVs. This finding supports previous reports of reduced PRS stratification for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers compared with noncarriers. Modification of risk in CHEK2 carriers associated with the 86-SNV score appeared to be similar to that observed in women without a PV. Larger studies are needed to provide more refined estimates of polygenic modification of risk for women with PVs in other moderate-penetrance genes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Susan M. Domchek
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
| | - Judy Garber
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Johnathan Lancaster
- Myriad Genetics Inc, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc, Tarrytown, New York
| | | | | | | | - Mark Robson
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Hughes E, Tshiaba P, Gallagher S, Wagner S, Judkins T, Roa B, Rosenthal E, Domchek S, Garber J, Lancaster J, Weitzel J, Kurian AW, Lanchbury JS, Gutin A, Robson M. Development and Validation of a Clinical Polygenic Risk Score to Predict Breast Cancer Risk. JCO Precis Oncol 2020; 4:PO.19.00360. [PMID: 32923876 PMCID: PMC7446363 DOI: 10.1200/po.19.00360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Women with a family history of breast cancer are frequently referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing, yet < 10% are found to have pathogenic variants in known breast cancer susceptibility genes. Large-scale genotyping studies have identified common variants (primarily single-nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]) with individually modest breast cancer risk that, in aggregate, account for considerable breast cancer susceptibility. Here, we describe the development and empirical validation of an SNP-based polygenic breast cancer risk score. METHODS A panel of 94 SNPs was examined for association with breast cancer in women of European ancestry undergoing hereditary cancer genetic testing and negative for pathogenic variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes. Candidate polygenic risk scores (PRSs) as predictors of personal breast cancer history were developed through multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, cancer history, and ancestry. An optimized PRS was validated in 2 independent cohorts (n = 13,174; n = 141,160). RESULTS Within the training cohort (n = 24,259), 4,291 women (18%) had a personal history of breast cancer and 8,725 women (36%) reported breast cancer in a first-degree relative. The optimized PRS included 86 variants and was highly predictive of breast cancer status in both validation cohorts (P = 6.4 × 10-66; P < 10-325). The odds ratio (OR) per unit standard deviation was consistent between validations (OR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.39 to 1.52]; OR 1.47 [95% CI, 1.45 to 1.49]). In a direct comparison, the 86-SNP PRS outperformed a previously described PRS of 77 SNPs. CONCLUSION The validation and implementation of a PRS for women without pathogenic variants in known breast cancer susceptibility genes offers potential for risk stratification to guide surveillance recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Susan Domchek
- University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Mark Robson
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Brentnall AR, van Veen EM, Harkness EF, Rafiq S, Byers H, Astley SM, Sampson S, Howell A, Newman WG, Cuzick J, Evans DGR. A case-control evaluation of 143 single nucleotide polymorphisms for breast cancer risk stratification with classical factors and mammographic density. Int J Cancer 2020; 146:2122-2129. [PMID: 31251818 PMCID: PMC7065068 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32541] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2019] [Accepted: 05/28/2019] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Panels of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) stratify risk for breast cancer in women from the general population, but studies are needed assess their use in a fully comprehensive model including classical risk factors, mammographic density and more than 100 SNPs associated with breast cancer. A case-control study was designed (1,668 controls, 405 cases) in women aged 47-73 years attending routine screening in Manchester UK, and enrolled in a wider study to assess methods for risk assessment. Risk from classical questionnaire risk factors was assessed using the Tyrer-Cuzick model; mean percentage visual mammographic density was scored by two independent readers. DNA extracted from saliva was genotyped at selected SNPs using the OncoArray. A predefined polygenic risk score based on 143 SNPs was calculated (SNP143). The odds ratio (OR, and 95% confidence interval, CI) per interquartile range (IQ-OR) of SNP143 was estimated unadjusted and adjusted for Tyrer-Cuzick and breast density. Secondary analysis assessed risk by oestrogen receptor (ER) status. The primary polygenic risk score was well calibrated (O/E OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86-1.34) and accuracy was retained after adjustment for Tyrer-Cuzick risk and mammographic density (IQ-OR unadjusted 2.12, 95% CI% 1.75-2.42; adjusted 2.06, 95% CI 1.75-2.42). SNP143 was a risk factor for ER+ and ER- breast cancer (adjusted IQ-OR, ER+ 2.11, 95% CI 1.78-2.51; ER- 1.81, 95% CI 1.16-2.84). In conclusion, polygenic risk scores based on a large number of SNPs improve risk stratification in combination with classical risk factors and mammographic density, and SNP143 was similarly predictive for ER-positive and ER-negative disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam R. Brentnall
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, Barts and The LondonQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Elke M. van Veen
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Elaine F. Harkness
- Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening CentreUniversity Hospital of South ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Sajjad Rafiq
- School of Public Health, Epidemiology & BiostatisticsImperial College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Helen Byers
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Susan M. Astley
- Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening CentreUniversity Hospital of South ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Sarah Sampson
- Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening CentreUniversity Hospital of South ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Anthony Howell
- Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening CentreUniversity Hospital of South ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- The Christie NHS Foundation TrustManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - William G. Newman
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Centre for Genomic MedicineManchester University NHS Foundation TrustManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, Barts and The LondonQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Dafydd Gareth R. Evans
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and HealthUniversity of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening CentreUniversity Hospital of South ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
- The Christie NHS Foundation TrustManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Centre for Genomic MedicineManchester University NHS Foundation TrustManchesterUnited Kingdom
- Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research CentreUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUnited Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
Strategies to prevent cancer and diagnose it early when it is most treatable are needed to reduce the public health burden from rising disease incidence. Risk assessment is playing an increasingly important role in targeting individuals in need of such interventions. For breast cancer many individual risk factors have been well understood for a long time, but the development of a fully comprehensive risk model has not been straightforward, in part because there have been limited data where joint effects of an extensive set of risk factors may be estimated with precision. In this article we first review the approach taken to develop the IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzick) model, and describe recent updates. We then review and develop methods to assess calibration of models such as this one, where the risk of disease allowing for competing mortality over a long follow-up time or lifetime is estimated. The breast cancer risk model model and calibration assessment methods are demonstrated using a cohort of 132,139 women attending mammography screening in the State of Washington, USA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam R. Brentnall
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse square, London, EC1M 6BQ
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse square, London, EC1M 6BQ
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Yanes T, Young MA, Meiser B, James PA. Clinical applications of polygenic breast cancer risk: a critical review and perspectives of an emerging field. Breast Cancer Res 2020; 22:21. [PMID: 32066492 PMCID: PMC7026946 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-020-01260-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2019] [Accepted: 02/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Polygenic factors are estimated to account for an additional 18% of the familial relative risk of breast cancer, with those at the highest level of polygenic risk distribution having a least a twofold increased risk of the disease. Polygenic testing promises to revolutionize health services by providing personalized risk assessments to women at high-risk of breast cancer and within population breast screening programs. However, implementation of polygenic testing needs to be considered in light of its current limitations, such as limited risk prediction for women of non-European ancestry. This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of the evidence for polygenic breast cancer risk, including the discovery of variants associated with breast cancer at the genome-wide level of significance and the use of polygenic risk scores to estimate breast cancer risk. We also review the different applications of this technology including testing of women from high-risk breast cancer families with uninformative genetic testing results, as a moderator of monogenic risk, and for population screening programs. Finally, a potential framework for introducing testing for polygenic risk in familial cancer clinics and the potential challenges with implementing this technology in clinical practice are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tatiane Yanes
- Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. .,The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Dermatology Research Centre, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
| | - Mary-Anne Young
- Kinghorn Centre for Clinical Genomics, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, 2010, Australia
| | - Bettina Meiser
- Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Paul A James
- Parkville Integrated Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Yu H, Shi Z, Wu Y, Wang CH, Lin X, Perschon C, Isaacs WB, Helfand BT, Lilly Zheng S, Duggan D, Mo Z, Lu D, Xu J. Concept and benchmarks for assessing narrow-sense validity of genetic risk score values. Prostate 2019; 79:1099-1105. [PMID: 31037745 DOI: 10.1002/pros.23821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2018] [Revised: 04/08/2019] [Accepted: 04/12/2019] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While higher genetic risk score (GRS) has been statistically associated with increased disease risk (broad-sense validity), the concept and tools for assessing the validity of reported GRS values from tests (narrow-sense validity) are underdeveloped. METHODS We propose two benchmarks for assessing the narrow-sense validity of GRS. The baseline benchmark requires that the mean GRS value in a general population approximates 1.0. The calibration benchmark assesses the agreement between observed risks and estimated risks (GRS values). We assessed benchmark performance for three prostate cancer (PCa) GRS tests, derived from three SNP panels with increasing stringency of selection criteria, in a PCa chemoprevention trial where 714 of 3225 men were diagnosed with PCa during the 4-year follow-up. RESULTS GRS from Panels 1, 2, and 3 were all statistically associated with PCa risk; P = 5.58 × 10-3 , P = 1 × 10-3 , and P = 1.5 × 10-13 , respectively (broad-sense validity). For narrow-sense validity, the mean GRS value among men without PCa was 1.33, 1.09, and 0.98 for Panels 1, 2, and 3, respectively (baseline benchmark). For assessing the calibration benchmark, observed risks were calculated for seven groups of men with GRS values <0.3, 0.3-0.79, 0.8-1.19, 1.2-1.49, 1.5-1.99, 2-2.99, and ≥3. The calibration slope (higher is better) was 0.15, 0.12, and 0.60, and the bias score (lower is better) between the observed risks and GRS values was 0.08, 0.08, and 0.02 for Panels 1, 2, and 3, respectively. CONCLUSION Performance differed considerably among GRS tests. We recommend that all GRS tests be evaluated using the two benchmarks before clinical implementation for individual risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongjie Yu
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - Zhuqing Shi
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Yishuo Wu
- Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Chi-Hsiung Wang
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - Xiaoling Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Chelsea Perschon
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - William B Isaacs
- Department of Urology and the James Buchanan Brady Urologic Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Brian T Helfand
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - S Lilly Zheng
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - David Duggan
- Genetic Basis of Human Disease Division, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Zengnan Mo
- Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
| | - Daru Lu
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Jianfeng Xu
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Zubor P, Kubatka P, Kajo K, Dankova Z, Polacek H, Bielik T, Kudela E, Samec M, Liskova A, Vlcakova D, Kulkovska T, Stastny I, Holubekova V, Bujnak J, Laucekova Z, Büsselberg D, Adamek M, Kuhn W, Danko J, Golubnitschaja O. Why the Gold Standard Approach by Mammography Demands Extension by Multiomics? Application of Liquid Biopsy miRNA Profiles to Breast Cancer Disease Management. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20:E2878. [PMID: 31200461 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20122878] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2019] [Revised: 06/07/2019] [Accepted: 06/11/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
In the global context, the epidemic of breast cancer (BC) is evident for the early 21st century. Evidence shows that national mammography screening programs have sufficiently reduced BC related mortality. Therefore, the great utility of the mammography-based screening is not an issue. However, both false positive and false negative BC diagnosis, excessive biopsies, and irradiation linked to mammography application, as well as sub-optimal mammography-based screening, such as in the case of high-dense breast tissue in young females, altogether increase awareness among the experts regarding the limitations of mammography-based screening. Severe concerns regarding the mammography as the “golden standard” approach demanding complementary tools to cover the evident deficits led the authors to present innovative strategies, which would sufficiently improve the quality of the BC management and services to the patient. Contextually, this article provides insights into mammography deficits and current clinical data demonstrating the great potential of non-invasive diagnostic tools utilizing circulating miRNA profiles as an adjunct to conventional mammography for the population screening and personalization of BC management.
Collapse
|
32
|
Lakeman IMM, Hilbers FS, Rodríguez-Girondo M, Lee A, Vreeswijk MPG, Hollestelle A, Seynaeve C, Meijers-Heijboer H, Oosterwijk JC, Hoogerbrugge N, Olah E, Vasen HFA, van Asperen CJ, Devilee P. Addition of a 161-SNP polygenic risk score to family history-based risk prediction: impact on clinical management in non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer families. J Med Genet 2019; 56:581-589. [DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-106072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2019] [Revised: 03/29/2019] [Accepted: 04/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BackgroundThe currently known breast cancer-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are presently not used to guide clinical management. We explored whether a genetic test that incorporates a SNP-based polygenic risk score (PRS) is clinically meaningful in non-BRCA1/2 high-risk breast cancer families.Methods101 non-BRCA1/2 high-risk breast cancer families were included; 323 cases and 262 unaffected female relatives were genotyped. The 161-SNP PRS was calculated and standardised to 327 population controls (sPRS). Association analysis was performed using a Cox-type random effect regression model adjusted by family history. Updated individualised breast cancer lifetime risk scores were derived by combining the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm breast cancer lifetime risk with the effect of the sPRS.ResultsThe mean sPRS for cases and their unaffected relatives was 0.70 (SD=0.9) and 0.53 (SD=0.9), respectively. A significant association was found between sPRS and breast cancer, HR=1.16, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.28, p=0.026. Addition of the sPRS to risk prediction based on family history alone changed screening recommendations in 11.5%, 14.7% and 19.8 % of the women according to breast screening guidelines from the USA (National Comprehensive Cancer Network), UK (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Netherlands (Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation), respectively.ConclusionOur results support the application of the PRS in risk prediction and clinical management of women from genetically unexplained breast cancer families.
Collapse
|
33
|
Danková Z, Žúbor P, Grendár M, Zelinová K, Jagelková M, Stastny I, Kapinová A, Vargová D, Kasajová P, Dvorská D, Kalman M, Danko J, Lasabová Z. Predictive accuracy of the breast cancer genetic risk model based on eight common genetic variants: The BACkSIDE study. J Biotechnol 2019; 299:1-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2019.04.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2019] [Revised: 04/11/2019] [Accepted: 04/15/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
34
|
Lakeman IMM, Schmidt MK, van Asperen CJ, Devilee P. Breast Cancer Susceptibility—Towards Individualised Risk Prediction. Curr Genet Med Rep 2019; 7:124-35. [DOI: 10.1007/s40142-019-00168-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
|
35
|
Shi Z, Yu H, Wu Y, Lin X, Bao Q, Jia H, Perschon C, Duggan D, Helfand BT, Zheng SL, Xu J. Systematic evaluation of cancer-specific genetic risk score for 11 types of cancer in The Cancer Genome Atlas and Electronic Medical Records and Genomics cohorts. Cancer Med 2019; 8:3196-3205. [PMID: 30968590 PMCID: PMC6558466 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.2143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2019] [Revised: 03/01/2019] [Accepted: 03/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Genetic risk score (GRS) is an odds ratio (OR)-weighted and population-standardized method for measuring cumulative effect of multiple risk-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We hypothesize that GRS is a valid tool for risk assessment of most common cancers. METHODS Utilizing genotype and phenotype data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE), we tested 11 cancer-specific GRSs (bladder, breast, colorectal, glioma, lung, melanoma, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, renal, and thyroid cancer) for association with the respective cancer type. Cancer-specific GRSs were calculated, for the first time in these cohorts, based on previously published risk-associated SNPs using the Caucasian subjects in these two cohorts. RESULTS Mean cancer-specific GRS in the population controls of eMERGE approximated the expected value of 1.00 (between 0.98 and 1.02) for all 11 types of cancer. Mean cancer-specific GRS was consistently higher in respective cancer patients than controls for all 11 types of cancer (P < 0.05). When subjects were categorized into low-, average-, and high-risk groups based on cancer-specific GRS (<0.5, 0.5-1.5, and >1.5, respectively), significant dose-response associations of higher cancer-specific GRS with higher OR of respective type of cancer were found for nine types of cancer (P-trend < 0.05). More than 64% subjects in the population controls of eMERGE can be classified as high risk for at least one type of these cancers. CONCLUSION Validity of GRS for predicting cancer risk is demonstrated for most types of cancer. If confirmed in larger studies, cancer-specific GRS may have the potential for developing personalized cancer screening strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhuqing Shi
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois.,State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Hongjie Yu
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - Yishuo Wu
- Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiaoling Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.,Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Quanwa Bao
- State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Haifei Jia
- Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Chelsea Perschon
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - David Duggan
- Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Brian T Helfand
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - Siqun L Zheng
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois
| | - Jianfeng Xu
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois.,State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.,Fudan Institute of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Affiliation(s)
- Montserrat Garcia-Closas
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Shady Grove Campus, Rockville, MD 20850.
| | - Nilanjan Chatterjee
- Bloomberg School of Public Health and Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Willoughby A, Andreassen PR, Toland AE. Genetic Testing to Guide Risk-Stratified Screens for Breast Cancer. J Pers Med 2019; 9:E15. [PMID: 30832243 DOI: 10.3390/jpm9010015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer screening modalities and guidelines continue to evolve and are increasingly based on risk factors, including genetic risk and a personal or family history of cancer. Here, we review genetic testing of high-penetrance hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, for the purpose of identifying high-risk individuals who would benefit from earlier screening and more sensitive methods such as magnetic resonance imaging. We also consider risk-based screening in the general population, including whether every woman should be genetically tested for high-risk genes and the potential use of polygenic risk scores. In addition to enabling early detection, the results of genetic screens of breast cancer susceptibility genes can be utilized to guide decision-making about when to elect prophylactic surgeries that reduce cancer risk and the choice of therapeutic options. Variants of uncertain significance, especially missense variants, are being identified during panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. A finding of a variant of uncertain significance does not provide a basis for increased cancer surveillance or prophylactic procedures. Given that variant classification is often challenging, we also consider the role of multifactorial statistical analyses by large consortia and functional tests for this purpose.
Collapse
|
38
|
Brédart A, Kop JL, Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, De Pauw A, Tischkowitz M, Ehrencrona H, Schmidt MK, Dolbeault S, Rhiem K, Easton DF, Devilee P, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Schmutlzer R. Clinicians' use of breast cancer risk assessment tools according to their perceived importance of breast cancer risk factors: an international survey. J Community Genet 2019; 10:61-71. [PMID: 29508368 PMCID: PMC6325038 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-018-0362-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2017] [Accepted: 02/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
The BOADICEA breast cancer (BC) risk assessment model and its associated Web Application v3 (BWA) tool are being extended to incorporate additional genetic and non-genetic BC risk factors. From an online survey through the BOADICEA website and UK, Dutch, French and Swedish national genetic societies, we explored the relationships between the usage frequencies of the BWA and six other common BC risk assessment tools and respondents' perceived importance of BC risk factors. Respondents (N = 443) varied in age, country and clinical seniority but comprised mainly genetics health professionals (82%) and BWA users (93%). Oncology professionals perceived reproductive, hormonal (exogenous) and lifestyle BC risk factors as more important in BC risk assessment compared to genetics professionals (p values < 0.05 to 0.0001). BWA was used more frequently by respondents who gave high weight to breast tumour pathology and low weight to personal BC history as BC risk factors. BWA use was positively related to the weight given to hormonal BC risk factors. The importance attributed to lifestyle and BMI BC risk factors was not associated with the use of BWA or any of the other tools. Next version of the BWA encompassing additional BC risk factors will facilitate more comprehensive BC risk assessment in genetics and oncology practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Brédart
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-Oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Cedex 05, Paris, France.
- University Paris Descartes, 71 avenue Edouard Vaillant, 92774, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
| | - Jean-Luc Kop
- Université de Lorraine, 2LPN-CEMA, 23 boulevard Albert 1er-BP, 60446-54001 Cedex, Nancy, France
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alex P Cunningham
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Antoine De Pauw
- Institut Curie, Cancer genetic clinic, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of Cambridge, Box 238, Level 6 Addenbrooke's Treatment Centre Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Hans Ehrencrona
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Laboratory Medicine, Office for Medical Services and Department of Clinical Genetics, Lund University, 221 85, Lund, Sweden
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Division of Molecular Pathology, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sylvie Dolbeault
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-Oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Cedex 05, Paris, France
- CESP, University Paris-Sud, UVSQ, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier, 94807, Villejuif, France
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34, I 50931, Cologne, Germany
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Human Genetics, Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Centre, S4-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Rita Schmutlzer
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34, I 50931, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Hui SK, Sun L, Ruel M. Genetics, coronary artery disease, and myocardial revascularization: will novel genetic risk scores bring new answers? Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 34:213-221. [PMID: 33060941 DOI: 10.1007/s12055-017-0635-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2017] [Revised: 12/04/2017] [Accepted: 12/13/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Both percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) are options for revascularization in multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the best form of revascularization remains controversial. Results from clinical trials (FREEDOM, SYNTAX, NOBLE, EXCEL) have identified factors related to CAD severity such as diabetes and SYNTAX score as indicators that patients may have better outcomes with CABG compared to PCI. Nevertheless, the discovery of other predictors of optimal revascularization therapy is necessary to improve decision-making and personalize the treatment of multi-vessel CAD. Genome-wide association studies have identified numerous previously unknown DNA variants that increase predisposition for CAD. Recently, a composite polygenic risk score has been developed to better assess the relative contribution of multiple SNPs and quantify overall genetic risk for CAD. High polygenic risk score is associated with increased coronary events and greater benefit from statin therapy in large observational studies. This effect is independent from traditional cardiovascular risk factors. At the same time, randomized clinical trials have shown that CAD severity is a determinant of optimal revascularization treatment. It remains unknown whether polygenic risk score is robustly associated with increased CAD severity at presentation, and whether this score can be used to identify patients who will show greater benefit from revascularization with CABG or with PCI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonya Kit Hui
- Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, University of Ottawa, 3402-40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, ON K1Y4W7 Canada
| | - Louise Sun
- Division of Cardiac Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, ON Canada
| | - Marc Ruel
- Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, University of Ottawa, 3402-40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, ON K1Y4W7 Canada
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Spaeth E, Starlard-Davenport A, Allman R. Bridging the Data Gap in Breast Cancer Risk Assessment to Enable Widespread Clinical Implementation across the Multiethnic Landscape of the US. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2018; 2:1-6. [PMID: 30662981 PMCID: PMC6334765 DOI: 10.29245/2578-2967/2018/4.1137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Breast cancer remains the second leading cause of cancer death among women and is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women. Breast cancer risk assessment has been clinically available for nearly 30 years yet is under-utilized in practice for multiple reasons. Incorporation of polygenic risk as well as breast density measurements, promise to increase the accuracy of risk assessment. With that comes the hope that both prevention and screening become more personalized and thus more effective. Incidence rates have been static over the past 15 years and have even increased slightly in African American and Asian/Pacific Islander populations despite the robust data on breast cancer risk reduction measures that exist. Current challenges in reducing breast cancer incidence begin with robust data curation that allows for appropriate risk stratification across our multiethnic population and conclude with the implementation of prevention strategies within our fractured healthcare system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Athena Starlard-Davenport
- Department of Genetics, Genomics and Informatics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Wunderle M, Olmes G, Nabieva N, Häberle L, Jud SM, Hein A, Rauh C, Hack CC, Erber R, Ekici AB, Hoyer J, Vasileiou G, Kraus C, Reis A, Hartmann A, Schulz-Wendtland R, Lux MP, Beckmann MW, Fasching PA. Risk, Prediction and Prevention of Hereditary Breast Cancer - Large-Scale Genomic Studies in Times of Big and Smart Data. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018; 78:481-492. [PMID: 29880983 PMCID: PMC5986564 DOI: 10.1055/a-0603-4350] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2018] [Revised: 04/09/2018] [Accepted: 04/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the last two decades genetic testing for mutations in
BRCA1
and
BRCA2
has become standard of care for women and men who are at familial risk for breast or ovarian cancer. Currently, genetic testing more often also includes so-called panel genes, which are assumed to be moderate-risk genes for breast cancer. Recently, new large-scale studies provided more information about the risk estimation of those genes. The utilization of information on panel genes with regard to their association with the individual breast cancer risk might become part of future clinical practice. Furthermore, large efforts have been made to understand the influence of common genetic variants with a low impact on breast cancer risk. For this purpose, almost 450 000 individuals have been genotyped for almost 500 000 genetic variants in the OncoArray project. Based on first results it can be assumed that – together with previously identified common variants – more than 170 breast cancer risk single nucleotide polymorphisms can explain up to 18% of familial breast cancer risk. The knowledge about genetic and non-genetic risk factors and its implementation in clinical practice could especially be of use for individualized prevention. This includes an individualized risk prediction as well as the individualized selection of screening methods regarding imaging and possible lifestyle interventions. The aim of this review is to summarize the most recent developments in this area and to provide an overview on breast cancer risk genes, risk prediction models and their utilization for the individual patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marius Wunderle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Gregor Olmes
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Naiba Nabieva
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Lothar Häberle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.,Biostatistics Unit, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Sebastian M Jud
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Alexander Hein
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Claudia Rauh
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Carolin C Hack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Ramona Erber
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Arif B Ekici
- Institute of Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Juliane Hoyer
- Institute of Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Georgia Vasileiou
- Institute of Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Cornelia Kraus
- Institute of Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - André Reis
- Institute of Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Arndt Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland
- Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Michael P Lux
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Cuzick J. Progress in preventive therapy for cancer: a reminiscence and personal viewpoint. Br J Cancer 2018; 118:1155-1161. [PMID: 29681616 PMCID: PMC5943239 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-018-0039-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2017] [Revised: 11/14/2017] [Accepted: 01/26/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Prophylactic drug treatment with aspirin, statins and anti-hypertensive agents has had a major impact on the incidence of cardiovascular disease and is now well established. Progress in therapeutic cancer prevention has been much slower; only recently have effective agents been clearly established. Breast cancer has led the way and endocrine agents used to treat it-notably tamoxifen and the aromatase inhibitors-have now been shown to have a substantial preventive effect as well. However, these agents carry some toxicity and thus identifying high-risk women who are likely to benefit most is a key priority. In contrast, the ability of low-dose aspirin to prevent about one-third of colorectal, gastric, and oesophageal cancers, combined with its much lower toxicity profile, make it attractive for a much larger proportion of the general population. Vaccination against the human papilloma virus is also a preventive intervention with large benefits for the whole population. Here I recall my involvement in these initiatives and offer a personal viewpoint on what has been achieved and what remains to be done.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Mitchell R, Buckingham L, Cobleigh M, Rotmensch J, Burgess K, Usha L. Can chimerism explain breast/ovarian cancers in BRCA non-carriers from BRCA-positive families? PLoS One 2018; 13:e0195497. [PMID: 29659587 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2017] [Accepted: 03/24/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is most frequently caused by mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (in short, BRCA) genes. The incidence of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in relatives of BRCA mutation carriers who test negative for the familial mutation (non-carriers) may be increased. However, the data is controversial, and at this time, these individuals are recommended the same cancer surveillance as general population. One possible explanation for BRCA phenocopies (close relatives of BRCA carriers who have developed cancer consistent with HBOC but tested negative for a familial mutation) is natural chimerism where lack of detectable mutation in blood may not rule out the presence of the mutation in the other tissues. To test this hypothesis, archival tumor tissue from eleven BRCA phenocopies was investigated. DNA from the tumor tissue was analyzed using sequence-specific PCR, capillary electrophoresis, and pyrosequencing. The familial mutations were originally detected in the patients’ first-degree relatives by commercial testing. The same testing detected no mutations in the blood of the patients under study. The test methods targeted only the known familial mutation in the tumor tissue. Tumor diagnoses included breast, ovarian, endometrial and primary peritoneal carcinoma. None of the familial mutations were found in the tumor samples tested. These results do not support, but do not completely exclude, the possibility of chimerism in these patients. Further studies with comprehensive sequence analysis in a larger patient group are warranted as a chimeric state would further refine the predictive value of genetic testing to include BRCA phenocopies.
Collapse
|
44
|
Evans DG, Howell SJ, Howell A. Personalized prevention in high risk individuals: Managing hormones and beyond. Breast 2018; 39:139-147. [PMID: 29610032 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2018] [Revised: 03/17/2018] [Accepted: 03/24/2018] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Increasing numbers of women are being identified at 'high-risk' of breast cancer, defined by The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as a 10-year risk of ≥8%. Classically women have been so identified through family history based risk algorithms or genetic testing of high-risk genes. Recent research has shown that assessment of mammographic density and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), when combined with established risk factors, trebles the number of women reaching the high risk threshold. The options for risk reduction in such women include endocrine chemoprevention with the selective estrogen receptor modulators tamoxifen and raloxifene or the aromatase inhibitors anastrozole or exemestane. NICE recommends offering anastrozole to postmenopausal women at high-risk of breast cancer as cost effectiveness analysis showed this to be cost saving to the National Health Service. Overall uptake to chemoprevention has been disappointingly low but this may improve with the improved efficacy of aromatase inhibitors, particularly the lack of toxicity to the endometrium and thrombogenic risks. Novel approaches to chemoprevention under investigation include lower dose and topical tamoxifen, denosumab, anti-progestins and metformin. Although oophorectomy is usually only recommended to women at increased risk of ovarian cancer it has been shown in numerous studies to reduce breast cancer risks in the general population and in those with mutations in BRCA1/2. However, recent evidence from studies that have confined analysis to true prospective follow up have cast doubt on the efficacy of oophorectomy to reduce breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers, at least in the short-term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Gareth Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK; Prevent Breast Cancer and Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| | - Sacha J Howell
- Prevent Breast Cancer and Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Anthony Howell
- Prevent Breast Cancer and Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Chan CHT, Munusamy P, Loke SY, Koh GL, Yang AZY, Law HY, Yoon CS, Wong CY, Yong WS, Wong NS, Ng RCH, Ong KW, Madhukumar P, Oey CL, Ho GH, Tan PH, Tan MH, Ang P, Yap YS, Lee ASG. Evaluation of three polygenic risk score models for the prediction of breast cancer risk in Singapore Chinese. Oncotarget 2018; 9:12796-804. [PMID: 29560110 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24374] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2017] [Accepted: 01/25/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have proven highly successful in identifying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk. The majority of these studies are on European populations, with limited SNP association data in other populations. We genotyped 51 GWAS-identified SNPs in two independent cohorts of Singaporean Chinese. Cohort 1 comprised 1294 BC cases and 885 controls and was used to determine odds ratios (ORs); Cohort 2 had 301 BC cases and 243 controls for deriving polygenic risk scores (PRS). After age-adjustment, 11 SNPs were found to be significantly associated with BC risk. Five SNPs were present in <1% of Cohort 1 and were excluded from further PRS analysis. To assess the cumulative effect of the remaining 46 SNPs on BC risk, we generated three PRS models: Model-1 included 46 SNPs; Model-2 included 11 statistically significant SNPs; and Model-3 included the SNPs in Model-2 but excluded SNPs that were in strong linkage disequilibrium with the others. Across Models-1, -2 and -3, women in the highest PRS quartile had the greatest ORs of 1.894 (95% CI = 1.157–3.100), 2.013 (95% CI = 1.227–3.302) and 1.751 (95% CI = 1.073–2.856) respectively, suggesting a direct correlation between PRS and BC risk. Given the potential of PRS in BC risk stratification, our findings suggest the need to tailor the selection of SNPs to be included in an ethnic-specific PRS model.
Collapse
|
46
|
Spjuth O, Karlsson A, Clements M, Humphreys K, Ivansson E, Dowling J, Eklund M, Jauhiainen A, Czene K, Grönberg H, Sparén P, Wiklund F, Cheddad A, Pálsdóttir Þ, Rantalainen M, Abrahamsson L, Laure E, Litton JE, Palmgren J. E-Science technologies in a workflow for personalized medicine using cancer screening as a case study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2018; 24:950-957. [PMID: 28444384 PMCID: PMC7651972 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocx038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2016] [Accepted: 03/17/2017] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective We provide an e-Science perspective on the workflow from risk factor discovery and classification of disease to evaluation of personalized intervention programs. As case studies, we use personalized prostate and breast cancer screenings. Materials and Methods We describe an e-Science initiative in Sweden, e-Science for Cancer Prevention and Control (eCPC), which supports biomarker discovery and offers decision support for personalized intervention strategies. The generic eCPC contribution is a workflow with 4 nodes applied iteratively, and the concept of e-Science signifies systematic use of tools from the mathematical, statistical, data, and computer sciences. Results The eCPC workflow is illustrated through 2 case studies. For prostate cancer, an in-house personalized screening tool, the Stockholm-3 model (S3M), is presented as an alternative to prostate-specific antigen testing alone. S3M is evaluated in a trial setting and plans for rollout in the population are discussed. For breast cancer, new biomarkers based on breast density and molecular profiles are developed and the US multicenter Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures (WISDOM) trial is referred to for evaluation. While current eCPC data management uses a traditional data warehouse model, we discuss eCPC-developed features of a coherent data integration platform. Discussion and Conclusion E-Science tools are a key part of an evidence-based process for personalized medicine. This paper provides a structured workflow from data and models to evaluation of new personalized intervention strategies. The importance of multidisciplinary collaboration is emphasized. Importantly, the generic concepts of the suggested eCPC workflow are transferrable to other disease domains, although each disease will require tailored solutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ola Spjuth
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences and Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Andreas Karlsson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mark Clements
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Keith Humphreys
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Emma Ivansson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jim Dowling
- School of Information and Communication Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Martin Eklund
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Alexandra Jauhiainen
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Early Clinical Biometrics, AstraZeneca AB R&D, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Henrik Grönberg
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Pär Sparén
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Fredrik Wiklund
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Abbas Cheddad
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden
| | - Þorgerður Pálsdóttir
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Nordic Information for Action e-Science Center, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mattias Rantalainen
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Linda Abrahamsson
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Erwin Laure
- School of Computer Science and Communication, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jan-Eric Litton
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure-European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Graz, Austria
| | - Juni Palmgren
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Swedish e-Science Research Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.,Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, Helsinki University, Helsinki, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Bond HM, Scicchitano S, Chiarella E, Amodio N, Lucchino V, Aloisio A, Montalcini Y, Mesuraca M, Morrone G. ZNF423: A New Player in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2018; 9:255. [PMID: 29867779 PMCID: PMC5968090 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2018.00255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2018] [Accepted: 05/03/2018] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Preventive therapy can target hormone-responsive breast cancer (BC) by treatment with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and reduce the incidence of BC. Genome-wide association studies have identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with relevant predictive values, SNPs in the ZNF423 gene were associated with decreased risk of BC during SERM therapy, and SNPs in the Cathepsin O gene with an increased risk. ZNF423, which was not previously associated with BC is a multifunctional transcription factor known to have a role in development, neurogenesis, and adipogenesis and is implicated in other types of cancer. ZNF423 is transcriptionally controlled by the homolog ZNF521, early B cell factor transcription factor, epigenetic silencing of the promoter by CpG island hyper-methylation, and also by ZNF423 itself in an auto-regulatory loop. In BC cells, ZNF423 expression is found to be induced by estrogen, dependent on the binding of the estrogen receptor and calmodulin-like 3 to SNPs in ZNP423 intronic sites in proximity to consensus estrogen response elements. ZNF423 has also been shown to play a mechanistic role by trans-activating the tumor suppressor BRCA1 and thus modulating the DNA damage response. Even though recent extensive trial studies did not classify these SNPs with the highest predictive values, for inclusion in polygenic SNP analysis, the mechanism unveiled in these studies has introduced ZNF423 as a factor important in the control of the estrogen response. Here, we aim at providing an overview of ZNF423 expression and functional role in human malignancies, with a specific focus on its implication in hormone-responsive BC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather M. Bond
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
- *Correspondence: Heather M. Bond, ; Maria Mesuraca, ; Giovanni Morrone,
| | - Stefania Scicchitano
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Emanuela Chiarella
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Nicola Amodio
- Laboratory of Medical Oncology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Valeria Lucchino
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Annamaria Aloisio
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Ylenia Montalcini
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Maria Mesuraca
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
- *Correspondence: Heather M. Bond, ; Maria Mesuraca, ; Giovanni Morrone,
| | - Giovanni Morrone
- Laboratory of Molecular Haematopoiesis and Stem Cell Biology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
- *Correspondence: Heather M. Bond, ; Maria Mesuraca, ; Giovanni Morrone,
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Affiliation(s)
- Rowan T. Chlebowski
- Rowan T. Chlebowski, Los Angeles BioMedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA
| |
Collapse
|