Fridley, Brooke L.

Abstract Four gene expression subtypes of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC) have been previously described. In these early studies, a fraction of samples that did not fit well into the four subtype classifications were excluded. Therefore, we sought to systematically determine the concordance of transcriptomic HGSC subtypes across populations without removing any samples. We created a bioinformatics pipeline to independently cluster the five largest mRNA expression datasets using k-means and nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF). We summarized differential expression patterns to compare clusters across studies. While previous studies reported four subtypes, our cross-population comparison does not support four. Because these results contrast with previous reports, we attempted to reproduce analyses performed in those studies. Our results suggest that early results favoring four subtypes may have been driven by the inclusion of serous borderline tumors. In summary, our analysis suggests that either two or three, but not four, gene expression subtypes are most consistent across datasets.

Background The rarity of mutations in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM make it difficult to estimate precisely associated cancer risks. Population-based family studies have provided evidence that at least some of these mutations are associated with breast cancer risk as high as those associated with rare BRCA2 mutations. We aimed to estimate the relative risks associated with specific rare variants in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM via a multicentre case-control study. Methods We genotyped 10 rare mutations using the custom iCOGS array: PALB2 c.1592delT, c.2816T>G and c.3113G>A, CHEK2 c.349A>G, c.538C>T, c.715G>A, c.1036C>T, c.1312G>T, and c.1343T>G and ATM c.7271T>G. We assessed associations with breast cancer risk (42 671 cases and 42 164 controls), as well as prostate (22 301 cases and 22 320 controls) and ovarian (14 542 cases and 23 491 controls) cancer risk, for each variant. Results For European women, strong evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for PALB2 c.1592delT OR 3.44 (95% CI 1.39 to 8.52, p=7.1×10−5), PALB2 c.3113G>A OR 4.21 (95% CI 1.84 to 9.60, p=6.9×10−8) and ATM c.7271T>G OR 11.0 (95% CI 1.42 to 85.7, p=0.0012). We also found evidence of association with breast cancer risk for three variants in CHEK2, c.349A>G OR 2.26 (95% CI 1.29 to 3.95), c.1036C>T OR 5.06 (95% CI 1.09 to 23.5) and c.538C>T OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.67) (p≤0.017). Evidence for prostate cancer risk was observed for CHEK2 c.1343T>G OR 3.03 (95% CI 1.53 to 6.03, p=0.0006) for African men and CHEK2 c.1312G>T OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.06 to 4.63, p=0.030) for European men. No evidence of association with ovarian cancer was found for any of these variants. Conclusions This report adds to accumulating evidence that at least some variants in these genes are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer that is clinically important.

Abstract Background: The strongest known risk factor for endometrial cancer is obesity. To determine whether SNPs associated with increased body mass index (BMI) or waist–hip ratio (WHR) are associated with endometrial cancer risk, independent of measured BMI, we investigated relationships between 77 BMI and 47 WHR SNPs and endometrial cancer in 6,609 cases and 37,926 country-matched controls. Methods: Logistic regression analysis and fixed effects meta-analysis were used to test for associations between endometrial cancer risk and (i) individual BMI or WHR SNPs, (ii) a combined weighted genetic risk score (wGRS) for BMI or WHR. Causality of BMI for endometrial cancer was assessed using Mendelian randomization, with BMIwGRS as instrumental variable. Results: The BMIwGRS was significantly associated with endometrial cancer risk (P = 3.4 × 10−17). Scaling the effect of the BMIwGRS on endometrial cancer risk by its effect on BMI, the endometrial cancer OR per 5 kg/m2 of genetically predicted BMI was 2.06 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.89–2.21], larger than the observed effect of BMI on endometrial cancer risk (OR = 1.55; 95% CI, 1.44–1.68, per 5 kg/m2). The association attenuated but remained significant after adjusting for BMI (OR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10–1.39; P = 5.3 × 10−4). There was evidence of directional pleiotropy (P = 1.5 × 10−4). BMI SNP rs2075650 was associated with endometrial cancer at study-wide significance (P < 4.0 × 10−4), independent of BMI. Endometrial cancer was not significantly associated with individual WHR SNPs or the WHRwGRS. Conclusions: BMI, but not WHR, is causally associated with endometrial cancer risk, with evidence that some BMI-associated SNPs alter endometrial cancer risk via mechanisms other than measurable BMI. Impact: The causal association between BMI SNPs and endometrial cancer has possible implications for endometrial cancer risk modeling. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(11); 1503–10. ©2016 AACR.

Abstract Background: Little transcriptomic research has compared epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) histological subtypes. We set out to characterize the transcriptomes of high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) and endometrioid carcinomas (EC), which make up around 70% and 20% of EOC tumors, respectively, and have some histopathological similarities. Methods: Fresh frozen tumors from EOC patients seen at the Mayo Clinic (30 EC and 62 HGSC) were used. 1ug RNA riboZero was used for library preparation using the Illumina TruSeq kit and sequenced on a HiSeq 2000 machine. Reads were aligned using TopHat2 followed by quantification of abundances using RSEM and differential expression analysis with edgeR. We analyzed transcriptomes, conducted pathway analyses, and summarized key candidate gene sets. Expressed SNVs (eSNVs) from the RNA-seq data were determined using GATK and RVboost. Results: The analysis found 699 genes with FDR < 1×10-5 for differential expression between HGSC and EC, with most genes being up-regulated in EC. The top most associated genes were TPH1, MAP2K6, KLK2, ADAM23, TESC and TRAF3IP2 (p<10-22). Pathway analysis of the genes up-regulated in EC revealed enrichment of the “basal cell carcinoma signaling pathway” (p = 1.2×10-5). Within 1 Mb of the 25 known EOC risk loci, we observed higher expression in HGSC for RSPO1 and HPSE (p <5×10-7). For genes functionally related to EOC, we observed in HGSC up-regulation (*p < 10-5, ⁁p<0.003) for FOXM1⁁, CDKN2A⁁, CCNE1*, CCND2⁁, PIK3CA*, BRCA2⁁, BIRC5⁁, MMP9⁁, FANCD2⁁, and MAML2⁁. In contrast, we found up-regulation in EC for MDM2*, KLK4*, BCL2⁁, CCND1*, ANXA4*, CDH1⁁, MMP7⁁, and MAML3⁁. We also identified 204 eSNVs (44 non-synonymous) associated with EC v HGSC subtype (p<10-4); this included an exonic TRAF3IP2 eSNV (66% EC, 13% HGSC, p = 4×10-7, chr6:111877117). Discussion: Using one of the largest sets of identically processed fresh-frozen EOC tumors, some patterns emerged among the numerous EC v HGSC transcriptomic differences. TPH1, up-expressed in EC, is regulated by SOX4 which was also up-regulated in EC. Two sets of genes related to Kallikreins serine proteases were differentially expressed, including KLK2 which is known to regulate EGFR and pro-inflammatory cytokines and is regulated by MYC. Lastly, TRAF3IP2 encodes for a protein involved in regulating cytokines through members of the NFKB pathway. Conclusions: These findings suggest important biological insights into one of the rarer EOC histologies and may aid in the development of targeted treatment options. Research is on-going to incorporate additional features (e.g., DNA methylation, copy number) into a “systems biology” framework to better understand the molecular differences between EOC histologies. Citation Format: Brooke L. Fridley, Junqiang Dai, Rama Raghavan, Chen Wang, Pengcheng Lu, Stacey Winham, Madalene Earp, Kate Lawrenson, Simon A. Gayther, Kimberly R. Kalli, Ellen L. Goode. Transcriptome characterization of high grade serous and endometrioid epithelial ovarian cancer tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 1833.

Abstract Background: Despite a large body of literature evaluating the association between recreational physical activity and epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk, the extant evidence is inconclusive, and little is known about the independent association between recreational physical inactivity and EOC risk. We conducted a pooled analysis of nine studies from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium to investigate the association between chronic recreational physical inactivity and EOC risk. Methods: In accordance with the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, women reporting no regular, weekly recreational physical activity were classified as inactive. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to estimate the ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between inactivity and EOC risk overall and by subgroups based upon histotype, menopausal status, race, and body mass index. Results: The current analysis included data from 8,309 EOC patients and 12,612 controls. We observed a significant positive association between inactivity and EOC risk (OR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.14–1.57), and similar associations were observed for each histotype. Conclusions: In this large pooled analysis examining the association between recreational physical inactivity and EOC risk, we observed consistent evidence of an association between chronic inactivity and all EOC histotypes. Impact: These data add to the growing body of evidence suggesting that inactivity is an independent risk factor for cancer. If the apparent association between inactivity and EOC risk is substantiated, additional work via targeted interventions should be pursued to characterize the dose of activity required to mitigate the risk of this highly fatal disease. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(7); 1114–24. ©2016 AACR.

Abstract Background: Many epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk factors relate to hormone exposure and elevated estrogen levels are associated with obesity in postmenopausal women. Therefore, we hypothesized that gene–environment interactions related to hormone-related risk factors could differ between obese and non-obese women. Methods: We considered interactions between 11,441 SNPs within 80 candidate genes related to hormone biosynthesis and metabolism and insulin-like growth factors with six hormone-related factors (oral contraceptive use, parity, endometriosis, tubal ligation, hormone replacement therapy, and estrogen use) and assessed whether these interactions differed between obese and non-obese women. Interactions were assessed using logistic regression models and data from 14 case–control studies (6,247 cases; 10,379 controls). Histotype-specific analyses were also completed. Results: SNPs in the following candidate genes showed notable interaction: IGF1R (rs41497346, estrogen plus progesterone hormone therapy, histology = all, P = 4.9 × 10−6) and ESR1 (rs12661437, endometriosis, histology = all, P = 1.5 × 10−5). The most notable obesity–gene–hormone risk factor interaction was within INSR (rs113759408, parity, histology = endometrioid, P = 8.8 × 10−6). Conclusions: We have demonstrated the feasibility of assessing multifactor interactions in large genetic epidemiology studies. Follow-up studies are necessary to assess the robustness of our findings for ESR1, CYP11A1, IGF1R, CYP11B1, INSR, and IGFBP2. Future work is needed to develop powerful statistical methods able to detect these complex interactions. Impact: Assessment of multifactor interaction is feasible, and, here, suggests that the relationship between genetic variants within candidate genes and hormone-related risk factors may vary EOC susceptibility. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(5); 780–90. ©2016 AACR.