Beckmann, Matthias W.

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.

Previous genome‐wide association studies among women of European ancestry identified two independent breast cancer susceptibility loci represented by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs13281615 and rs11780156 at 8q24. A fine‐mapping study across 2.06 Mb (chr8:127,561,724–129,624,067, hg19) in 55,540 breast cancer cases and 51,168 controls within the Breast Cancer Association Consortium was conducted. Three additional independent association signals in women of European ancestry, represented by rs35961416 (OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.93–0.97, conditional p = 5.8 × 10−6), rs7815245 (OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.91–0.96, conditional p = 1.1 × 10−6) and rs2033101 (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.02–1.07, conditional p = 1.1 × 10−4) were found. Integrative analysis using functional genomic data from the Roadmap Epigenomics, the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements project, the Cancer Genome Atlas and other public resources implied that SNPs rs7815245 in Signal 3, and rs1121948 in Signal 5 (in linkage disequilibrium with rs11780156, r2 = 0.77), were putatively functional variants for two of the five independent association signals. The results highlighted multiple 8q24 variants associated with breast cancer susceptibility in women of European ancestry.

Abstract Background: A recent association study identified a common variant (rs9790517) at 4q24 to be associated with breast cancer risk. Independent association signals and potential functional variants in this locus have not been explored. Methods: We conducted a fine-mapping analysis in 55,540 breast cancer cases and 51,168 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results: Conditional analyses identified two independent association signals among women of European ancestry, represented by rs9790517 [conditional P = 2.51 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02–1.07] and rs77928427 (P = 1.86 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02–1.07). Functional annotation using data from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project revealed two putative functional variants, rs62331150 and rs73838678 in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with rs9790517 (r2 ≥ 0.90) residing in the active promoter or enhancer, respectively, of the nearest gene, TET2. Both variants are located in DNase I hypersensitivity and transcription factor–binding sites. Using data from both The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC), we showed that rs62331150 was associated with level of expression of TET2 in breast normal and tumor tissue. Conclusion: Our study identified two independent association signals at 4q24 in relation to breast cancer risk and suggested that observed association in this locus may be mediated through the regulation of TET2. Impact: Fine-mapping study with large sample size warranted for identification of independent loci for breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(11); 1680–91. ©2015 AACR.

Abstract Background: Guidelines recommend germline mutation testing of breast cancer predisposition genes in triple negative (TN) breast cancer cases with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer or when diagnosed under age 60. However, the prevalence of mutations in these genes among TN cases unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer is not known. Methods: To assess the frequency of mutations in 16 predisposition genes in TN cases we screened a large cohort of TN patients (n=1824) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer from 12 centers and 824 study matched unaffected controls for mutations using a panel-based sequencing approach. Results: Deleterious mutations were identified in 15% of TN patients: 8.5% had BRCA1, 2.7% had BRCA2, and 3.6% had mutations in 12 other genes. Mutations in non-BRCA1/2 genes encoding proteins implicated in homologous recombination repair of DNA double strand breaks were detected at the same frequency as in breast cancer families. TN cases with mutations had high-grade tumors and were diagnosed at an earlier age than non-mutated cases. However, 10% of TN cases diagnosed at ≥60 years and 5% with no family history of cancer were also found to carry mutations. Inactivating mutations in non-BRCA1/2 predisposition genes were associated with moderate to high risks of TN breast cancer. Conclusions: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines support clinical genetic testing of breast cancer predisposition genes in 95% of TN breast cancer patients carrying mutations in susceptibility genes. In contrast, National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines in the U.K. do not support genetic testing of a substantial proportion of TN patients with predisposing alleles. Frequency tables for inherited mutations in known predisposition genes based on age of diagnosis and family history of cancer will allow for selection of TN patients most likely to carry mutations in the predisposition genes. Citation Format: Fergus J Couch, Steven N Hart, Priyanka Sharma, Amanda Ewart Toland, Penelope Miron, Janet E Olson, Andrew Godwin, Vernon S Pankratz, Curtis Olswold, Seth Slettedahl, Lucia Guidugli, Matthias W Beckmann, Brigitte Rack, Arif B Ekici, Irene Konstantopoulou, Florentia Fostira, George Fountzilas, Liisa M Pelttari, Song Yao, Judy Garber, Angela Cox, Hiltrud Brauch, Christine Ambrosone, Heli Nevanlinna, Drakoulis Yannoukakos, Susan L Slager, Celine M Vachon, Diana M Eccles, Peter A Fasching. Triple-negative breast cancer: Frequency of inherited mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-12-03.

Abstract Mammographic density measures adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI) are heritable predictors of breast cancer risk, but few mammographic density-associated genetic variants have been identified. Using data for 10,727 women from two international consortia, we estimated associations between 77 common breast cancer susceptibility variants and absolute dense area, percent dense area and absolute nondense area adjusted for study, age, and BMI using mixed linear modeling. We found strong support for established associations between rs10995190 (in the region of ZNF365), rs2046210 (ESR1), and rs3817198 (LSP1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas (all P < 10−5). Of 41 recently discovered breast cancer susceptibility variants, associations were found between rs1432679 (EBF1), rs17817449 (MIR1972-2: FTO), rs12710696 (2p24.1), and rs3757318 (ESR1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas, respectively. There were associations between rs6001930 (MKL1) and both adjusted absolute dense and nondense areas, and between rs17356907 (NTN4) and adjusted absolute nondense area. Trends in all but two associations were consistent with those for breast cancer risk. Results suggested that 18% of breast cancer susceptibility variants were associated with at least one mammographic density measure. Genetic variants at multiple loci were associated with both breast cancer risk and the mammographic density measures. Further understanding of the underlying mechanisms at these loci could help identify etiologic pathways implicated in how mammographic density predicts breast cancer risk. Cancer Res; 75(12); 2457–67. ©2015 AACR.

Purpose Recent advances in DNA sequencing have led to the development of breast cancer susceptibility gene panels for germline genetic testing of patients. We assessed the frequency of mutations in 17 predisposition genes, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, in a large cohort of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer to determine the utility of germline genetic testing for those with TNBC. Patients and Methods Patients with TNBC (N = 1,824) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited through 12 studies, and germline DNA was sequenced to identify mutations. Results Deleterious mutations were identified in 14.6% of all patients. Of these, 11.2% had mutations in the BRCA1 (8.5%) and BRCA2 (2.7%) genes. Deleterious mutations in 15 other predisposition genes were detected in 3.7% of patients, with the majority observed in genes involved in homologous recombination, including PALB2 (1.2%) and BARD1, RAD51D, RAD51C, and BRIP1 (0.3% to 0.5%). Patients with TNBC with mutations were diagnosed at an earlier age (P < .001) and had higher-grade tumors (P = .01) than those without mutations. Conclusion Deleterious mutations in predisposition genes are present at high frequency in patients with TNBC unselected for family history of cancer. Mutation prevalence estimates suggest that patients with TNBC, regardless of age at diagnosis or family history of cancer, should be considered for germline genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Although mutations in other predisposition genes are observed among patients with TNBC, better cancer risk estimates are needed before these mutations are used for clinical risk assessment in relatives.

A large genotyping project within the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) recently identified 41 associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and overall breast cancer (BC) risk. We investigated whether the effects of these 41 SNPs, as well as six SNPs associated with estrogen receptor (ER) negative BC risk are modified by 13 environmental risk factors for BC. Data from 22 studies participating in BCAC were pooled, comprising up to 26,633 cases and 30,119 controls. Interactions between SNPs and environmental factors were evaluated using an empirical Bayes‐type shrinkage estimator. Six SNPs showed interactions with associated p ‐values ( p int ) <1.1 × 10 −3 . None of the observed interactions was significant after accounting for multiple testing. The Bayesian False Discovery Probability was used to rank the findings, which indicated three interactions as being noteworthy at 1% prior probability of interaction. SNP rs6828523 was associated with increased ER‐negative BC risk in women ≥170 cm (OR = 1.22, p = 0.017), but inversely associated with ER‐negative BC risk in women <160 cm (OR = 0.83, p = 0.039, p int = 1.9 × 10 −4 ). The inverse association between rs4808801 and overall BC risk was stronger for women who had had four or more pregnancies (OR = 0.85, p = 2.0 × 10 −4 ), and absent in women who had had just one (OR = 0.96, p = 0.19, p int = 6.1 × 10 −4 ). SNP rs11242675 was inversely associated with overall BC risk in never/former smokers (OR = 0.93, p = 2.8 × 10 −5 ), but no association was observed in current smokers (OR = 1.07, p = 0.14, p int = 3.4 × 10 −4 ). In conclusion, recently identified BC susceptibility loci are not strongly modified by established risk factors and the observed potential interactions require confirmation in independent studies.

ABSTRACTGenes that alter disease risk only in combination with certain environmental exposures may not be detected in genetic association analysis. By using methods accounting for gene‐environment (G × E) interaction, we aimed to identify novel genetic loci associated with breast cancer risk. Up to 34,475 cases and 34,786 controls of European ancestry from up to 23 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium were included. Overall, 71,527 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), enriched for association with breast cancer, were tested for interaction with 10 environmental risk factors using three recently proposed hybrid methods and a joint test of association and interaction. Analyses were adjusted for age, study, population stratification, and confounding factors as applicable. Three SNPs in two independent loci showed statistically significant association: SNPs rs10483028 and rs2242714 in perfect linkage disequilibrium on chromosome 21 and rs12197388 in ARID1B on chromosome 6. While rs12197388 was identified using the joint test with parity and with age at menarche (P‐values = 3 × 10−07), the variants on chromosome 21 q22.12, which showed interaction with adult body mass index (BMI) in 8,891 postmenopausal women, were identified by all methods applied. SNP rs10483028 was associated with breast cancer in women with a BMI below 25 kg/m2 (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.15–1.38) but not in women with a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or higher (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.72–1.11, P for interaction = 3.2 × 10−05). Our findings confirm comparable power of the recent methods for detecting G × E interaction and the utility of using G × E interaction analyses to identify new susceptibility loci.