Easton, Doug

Abstract Studies have identified genetic and epidemiologic factors associated with mammographic density (MD) phenotypes. However, MD-associated genetic variants only account for a small proportion of the total estimated heritability. Interrogating interactions between genetic and epidemiologic factors could potentially identify additional MD-associated loci, expand our understanding of the genetic basis of MD phenotypes, and clarify how epidemiologic factors modulate relationships between genetic variants and MD. We conducted six separate genome-wide, gene–environment (GxE) interaction analyses, applying 2 degrees of freedom (df) and 1df interaction tests, for each of three MD phenotypes (percent density, dense area (DA), and nondense area (NDA)). The six epidemiologic factors considered were height, ever parous, parity, ever menopausal hormone therapy, ever breastfeeding, and months of breastfeeding. We included European ancestry participants from multiple studies within the Markers of Density consortium and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (n = 4895-16 218 depending on specific analyses). We identified 11 loci with genome-wide significant (P < 5 × 10−8) interaction tests including two novel common genetic signals interacting with parity (8p21.2) and ever breastfeeding (19p13.2) for NDA. Our results suggest that epidemiologic risk factors might influence relationships between common genetic variants and MD phenotypes at particular genomic loci.

Abstract Background Most breast biopsies are diagnosed as benign breast disease, with 1.5- to 4-fold increased breast cancer risk. Apart from pathologic diagnoses of atypical hyperplasia, few factors aid in breast cancer risk assessment of these patients. We assessed whether a 313–single nucleotide variation (formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism) polygenic risk score stratifies risk of benign breast disease patients. Methods We pooled data from 5 Breast Cancer Association Consortium case-control studies (mean age = 59.9 years), including 6706 participants with breast cancer and 8488 participants without breast cancer. Using logistic regression, we estimated breast cancer risk associations by self-reported benign breast disease history and strata of polygenic risk score, with median polygenic risk score category among women without benign breast disease as the referent. We assessed interactions and mediation of benign breast disease and polygenic risk score with breast cancer risk. Results Benign breast disease history was associated with increased breast cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] = 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37 to 1.60; P < .001). Polygenic risk score increased breast cancer risk, irrespective of benign breast disease history (Pinteraction = .48), with minimal evidence of mediation of either factor by the other. Women with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the highest tertile had more than twofold increased odds of breast cancer (OR = 2.73, 95% CI = 2.41 to 3.09), and those with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the lowest tertile experienced reduced breast cancer risk (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.91) compared with the referent group. Women with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the highest decile had a 3.7-fold increase (95% CI = 3.00 to 4.61) compared with those with median polygenic risk score without benign breast disease. Conclusion Breast cancer risks are elevated among women with benign breast disease and increase progressively with polygenic risk score, suggesting that optimal combinations of these factors may improve risk stratification.

Abstract Over one million biopsies are performed annually in the U.S. to evaluate suspicious breast lesions. Most biopsies lead to a diagnosis of benign breast disease (BBD) and these women have a 1.5- to fourfold increase in subsequent breast cancer (BC) risk compared with the general population. A polygenic risk score (PRS) including 313 common variants was developed to predict BC risk in the general population and has improved performance when added to existing BC prediction models. However, the value of PRS in risk prediction models among women with BBD has not been evaluated. To evaluate the role of the established PRS, BBD, and BC risk, we pooled data from 15,194 white women (6,706 BC cases and 8,488 controls) participating in five Breast Cancer Association Consortium case-control studies. BC risk associations were evaluated by self-reported BBD history and combinations of PRS expressed in tertiles using odds ratios (OR), considering the lowest category of PRS among women without BBD as the referent. Associations were also assessed in an independent case-cohort study (831 BC cases and 1,845 controls) using hazard ratios (HR). Among the case-control studies, the PRS was strongly associated with BC risk (OR=2.50 per standard deviation increase), and associations were similar in women with (OR=2.60) and without a history of BBD (OR=2.44, p-interaction=0.23). Women with BBD have a higher risk of BC than those without BBD within each level of PRS. Compared to women without BBD and in the lowest PRS category, those with BBD and PRS in the highest tertile had 5-fold increased odds of BC (OR = 5.38; 95% CI 4.73-6.13). Associations were similar in an independent case-cohort study. These findings indicate that BBD history and PRS are independent contributors to BC risk, and consideration of both simultaneously could improve breast cancer risk prediction. Future studies are needed to integrate PRS with other risk measures to refine absolute BC risk prediction among BBD patients. Associations of BC risk with combinations of PRS (tertiles) and history of BBD in five case-control studies and a case-cohort study from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Case-control studies Case-cohort study PRS score range History of BBD n BC cases n controls OR (95% CI)1 n BC cases n controls HR (95% CI)2 Tertile 1 (≤ -0.57) No 1009 2692 1.00 (Ref) 117 584 1.00 (Ref) Yes 508 902 1.54 (1.35-1.76) 69 163 2.05 (1.45-2.89) Tertile 2 (-0.58, -0.03) No 1469 2001 1.97 (1.78-2.17) 181 475 1.93 (1.48-2.51) Yes 760 798 2.65 (2.34-3.01) 108 170 2.99 (2.18-4.09) Tertile 3 (≥ -0.02) No 1910 1551 3.32 (3.01-3.67) 214 336 3.28 (2.52-4.26) Yes 1050 544 5.38 (4.73-6.13) 142 117 4.83 4.25-8.02) 1.Logistic regression analysis, adjusted for study site/genomic platform and age at enrollment. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.2.Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, accounting for the case-cohort study design and adjusted for age at enrollment. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. Citation Format: Stacey J. Winham, Mark Sherman, Robert Vierkant, Bryan McCauley, Christopher Scott, Mia Gaudet, Melissa Troester, Sandhya Pruthi, Derek Radisky, Amy Degnim, Kristan Aronson, Rachel Murphy, Pascal Guenel, Therese Truong, Jenny Chang-Claude, Heiko Becher, Montserrat Garcia-Closas, Stephen Chanock, Thomas Ahearn, Xiaohong Yang, Doug Easton, Manjeet Bolla, Celine Vachon, Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Association of polygenic risk scores with breast cancer risk among women with benign breast disease. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 5241.

AbstractBackgroundReproductive factors have been shown to be differentially associated with risk of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative breast cancer. However, their associations with intrinsic-like subtypes are less clear.MethodsAnalyses included up to 23 353 cases and 71 072 controls pooled from 31 population-based case-control or cohort studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium across 16 countries on 4 continents. Polytomous logistic regression was used to estimate the association between reproductive factors and risk of breast cancer by intrinsic-like subtypes (luminal A-like, luminal B-like, luminal B-HER2–like, HER2-enriched–like, and triple-negative breast cancer) and by invasiveness. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsCompared with nulliparous women, parous women had a lower risk of luminal A-like, luminal B-like, luminal B-HER2–like, and HER2-enriched–like disease. This association was apparent only after approximately 10 years since last birth and became stronger with increasing time (odds ratio [OR] = 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49 to 0.71; and OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.28 to 0.46 for multiparous women with luminal A-like tumors 20 to less than 25 years after last birth and 45 to less than 50 years after last birth, respectively). In contrast, parous women had a higher risk of triple-negative breast cancer right after their last birth (for multiparous women: OR = 3.12, 95% CI = 2.02 to 4.83) that was attenuated with time but persisted for decades (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.34, for multiparous women 25 to less than 30 years after last birth). Older age at first birth (Pheterogeneity < .001 for triple-negative compared with luminal A-like breast cancer) and breastfeeding (Pheterogeneity < .001 for triple-negative compared with luminal A-like breast cancer) were associated with lower risk of triple-negative breast cancer but not with other disease subtypes. Younger age at menarche was associated with higher risk of all subtypes; older age at menopause was associated with higher risk of luminal A-like but not triple-negative breast cancer. Associations for in situ tumors were similar to luminal A-like.ConclusionsThis large and comprehensive study demonstrates a distinct reproductive risk factor profile for triple-negative breast cancer compared with other subtypes, with implications for the understanding of disease etiology and risk prediction.

AbstractBackgroundRecent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.Methods483 BRCA1 and 1318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were 3 versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen receptor (ER)–negative (PRSER-), or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk.ResultsPRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07 to 1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28 to 2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer odds ratios were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions.ConclusionsPopulation-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and informing clinical management.

Abstract Background: Prospective validation of breast cancer risk models integrating classical risk factors and genetic variants is required for risk-stratified prevention and screening strategies. The objective of this study was to validate a breast cancer risk model integrating classical risk factors and a 313-variant polygenic risk score (PRS) in multiple prospective cohort studies, and to project five-year risk of breast cancer in six different countries. Methods: The study population included 7,529 cases and 230,103 controls from 14 prospective cohort studies in Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, and USA. We used the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimator (iCARE) tool for risk model building, validation, and risk projection. Expected five-year risk of invasive or in situ breast cancer was compared to observed risk, overall and within deciles of expected risk using goodness of fit statistics. We evaluated calibration of the relative risk through meta-analysis across cohorts, and of the absolute risk within each cohort. Model discrimination was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), and percentages of women crossing risk thresholds. Projections of five-year risk distributions were estimated for women of European ancestry aged 50-70 years in the general populations of these six countries. Results: Analysis showed overall good calibration of the integrated iCARE-based model relative risk for both women younger than 50 years (χ2=14.9, P=0.09) and aged 50 years or older (χ2=14.6, P=0.10), with a small overestimation of risk for women in the highest decile of expected risk (RR = 3.5 expected vs 2.3 (95% CI 1.6 to 3.2) observed for women <50 years; and 2.8 expected vs 2.3 (95% CI 2.0 to 2.7) observed for women 50+ years). The age-adjusted AUCs for the integrated model were 63.1 (95% CI 60.9 to 65.3) and 62.9 (95% CI 61.8 to 64.0), for the two age groups respectively. The calibration of absolute risk showed substantial variation across cohorts, particularly for the older group, but had no systematic bias. Model based projections in the general populations showed that compared to the population average, women in the 1st and 99th percentiles of the integrated risk score had relative risks 0.19 and 3.56 respectively. The proportion of women of European ancestry aged 50-70 years with a five-year risk greater than 3% (threshold for consideration of risk-lowering drugs by U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) ranged from 7.1% in Germany to 18.2% in the US, which corresponds to ~5.5 million women in the US. Conclusions: Five-year risk predictions from a model with classical risk factors and PRS are well calibrated and provide substantial risk stratification across multiple cohorts in six different countries. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical utility of the validated model for risk stratified screening and prevention of breast cancer. Citation Format: Parichoy Pal Choudhury, Amber Wilcox, Chi Gao, Brian Carter, Anika Husing, Mark Brook, Mikael Eriksson, Kara Martin, Chris Scott, Min Shi, Thomas Ahearn, Michael Jones, Nick Orr, Minouk Schoemaker, Kamila Czene, Jenny Chang-Claude, Jacques Simard, Doug Easton, Marjanka K. Schmidt, Dale Sandler, Clarice R. Weinberg, Celine Vachon, Roger Milne, Per Hall, Anthony Swerdlow, Rudolph Kaaks, Myrto Barrdahl, Mia Gaudet, Antonis Antoniou, Peter Kraft, Montserrat Garcia-Closas, Nilanjan Chatterjee. Validation of breast cancer risk model incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk scores in 14 prospective cohort studies in 6 countries [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 962.

AbstractMotivationThe use of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) interactions to predict complex diseases is getting more attention during the past decade, but related statistical methods are still immature. We previously proposed the SNP Interaction Pattern Identifier (SIPI) approach to evaluate 45 SNP interaction patterns/patterns. SIPI is statistically powerful but suffers from a large computation burden. For large-scale studies, it is necessary to use a powerful and computation-efficient method. The objective of this study is to develop an evidence-based mini-version of SIPI as the screening tool or solitary use and to evaluate the impact of inheritance mode and model structure on detecting SNP–SNP interactions.ResultsWe tested two candidate approaches: the ‘Five-Full’ and ‘AA9int’ method. The Five-Full approach is composed of the five full interaction models considering three inheritance modes (additive, dominant and recessive). The AA9int approach is composed of nine interaction models by considering non-hierarchical model structure and the additive mode. Our simulation results show that AA9int has similar statistical power compared to SIPI and is superior to the Five-Full approach, and the impact of the non-hierarchical model structure is greater than that of the inheritance mode in detecting SNP–SNP interactions. In summary, it is recommended that AA9int is a powerful tool to be used either alone or as the screening stage of a two-stage approach (AA9int+SIPI) for detecting SNP–SNP interactions in large-scale studies.Availability and implementationThe ‘AA9int’ and ‘parAA9int’ functions (standard and parallel computing version) are added in the SIPI R package, which is freely available at https://linhuiyi.github.io/LinHY_Software/.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Abstract Motivation Testing SNP–SNP interactions is considered as a key for overcoming bottlenecks of genetic association studies. However, related statistical methods for testing SNP–SNP interactions are underdeveloped. Results We propose the SNP Interaction Pattern Identifier (SIPI), which tests 45 biologically meaningful interaction patterns for a binary outcome. SIPI takes non-hierarchical models, inheritance modes and mode coding direction into consideration. The simulation results show that SIPI has higher power than MDR (Multifactor Dimensionality Reduction), AA_Full, Geno_Full (full interaction model with additive or genotypic mode) and SNPassoc in detecting interactions. Applying SIPI to the prostate cancer PRACTICAL consortium data with approximately 21 000 patients, the four SNP pairs in EGFR-EGFR, EGFR-MMP16 and EGFR-CSF1 were found to be associated with prostate cancer aggressiveness with the exact or similar pattern in the discovery and validation sets. A similar match for external validation of SNP–SNP interaction studies is suggested. We demonstrated that SIPI not only searches for more meaningful interaction patterns but can also overcome the unstable nature of interaction patterns. Availability and Implementation The SIPI software is freely available at http://publichealth.lsuhsc.edu/LinSoftware/. Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Coffee consumption has been shown in some studies to be associated with lower risk of prostate cancer. However, it is unclear if this association is causal or due to confounding or reverse causality. We conducted a Mendelian randomisation analysis to investigate the causal effects of coffee consumption on prostate cancer risk and progression. We used two genetic variants robustly associated with caffeine intake (rs4410790 and rs2472297) as proxies for coffee consumption in a sample of 46,687 men of European ancestry from 25 studies in the PRACTICAL consortium. Associations between genetic variants and prostate cancer case status, stage and grade were assessed by logistic regression and with all‐cause and prostate cancer‐specific mortality using Cox proportional hazards regression. There was no clear evidence that a genetic risk score combining rs4410790 and rs2472297 was associated with prostate cancer risk (OR per additional coffee increasing allele: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.98,1.03) or having high‐grade compared to low‐grade disease (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97,1.04). There was some evidence that the genetic risk score was associated with higher odds of having nonlocalised compared to localised stage disease (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.06). Amongst men with prostate cancer, there was no clear association between the genetic risk score and all‐cause mortality (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97,1.04) or prostate cancer‐specific mortality (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.98,1.08). These results, which should have less bias from confounding than observational estimates, are not consistent with a substantial effect of coffee consumption on reducing prostate cancer incidence or progression.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in developed countries, and is a target for risk reduction strategies. The effects of alcohol consumption on prostate cancer incidence and survival remain unclear, potentially due to methodological limitations of observational studies. In this study, we investigated the associations of genetic variants in alcohol‐metabolising genes with prostate cancer incidence and survival. We analysed data from 23,868 men with prostate cancer and 23,051 controls from 25 studies within the international PRACTICAL Consortium. Study‐specific associations of 68 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 8 alcohol‐metabolising genes (Alcohol Dehydrogenases (ADHs) and Aldehyde Dehydrogenases (ALDHs)) with prostate cancer diagnosis and prostate cancer‐specific mortality, by grade, were assessed using logistic and Cox regression models, respectively. The data across the 25 studies were meta‐analysed using fixed‐effect and random‐effects models. We found little evidence that variants in alcohol metabolising genes were associated with prostate cancer diagnosis. Four variants in two genes exceeded the multiple testing threshold for associations with prostate cancer mortality in fixed‐effect meta‐analyses. SNPs within ALDH1A2 associated with prostate cancer mortality were rs1441817 (fixed effects hazard ratio, HRfixed = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (95%CI):0.66,0.91; p values = 0.002); rs12910509, HRfixed = 0.76; 95%CI:0.64,0.91; p values = 0.003); and rs8041922 (HRfixed = 0.76; 95%CI:0.64,0.91; p values = 0.002). These SNPs were in linkage disequilibrium with each other. In ALDH1B1, rs10973794 (HRfixed = 1.43; 95%CI:1.14,1.79; p values = 0.002) was associated with prostate cancer mortality in men with low‐grade prostate cancer. These results suggest that alcohol consumption is unlikely to affect prostate cancer incidence, but it may influence disease progression.