Zheng, Jie

Abstract Recent research suggests higher circulating lymphocyte counts may protect against colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the role of specific lymphocyte subtypes and activation states remain unclear. CD4+ T cells—a highly dynamic lymphocyte subtype—undergo gene expression changes upon activation that are critical to their effector function. Previous studies using bulk tissue have limited our understanding of their role in CRC risk to static associations. We applied Mendelian randomization (MR) and genetic colocalisation to evaluate causal relationships of gene expression on CRC risk across multiple CD4+ T cell subtypes and activation states. Genetic proxies were obtained from single-cell transcriptomic data, allowing us to investigate the causal effect of expression of 1,805 genes across CD4+ T cell activation states on CRC risk (78,473 cases; 107,143 controls). Analyses were stratified by CRC anatomical subsites and sex, with sensitivity analyses assessing whether the observed effect estimates were likely to be CD4+ T cell-specific. We identified 6 genes—FADS2, FHL3, HLA-DRB1, HLA-DRB5, RPL28, and TMEM258—with strong evidence for a causal role in CRC development (FDR-P < 0.05; colocalisation H4 > 0.8). Causal estimates varied by CD4+ T cell subtype, activation state, CRC subsite and sex. However, many of genetic proxies used to instrument gene expression in CD4+ T cells also act as eQTLs in other tissues, highlighting the challenges of using genetic proxies to instrument tissue-specific expression changes. We demonstrate the importance of capturing the dynamic nature of CD4+ T cells in understanding CRC risk, and prioritize genes for further investigation in cancer prevention.

Abstract Background Mendelian randomization (MR) studies are susceptible to metadata errors (e.g. incorrect specification of the effect allele column) and other analytical issues that can introduce substantial bias into analyses. We developed a quality control (QC) pipeline for the Fatty Acids in Cancer Mendelian Randomization Collaboration (FAMRC) that can be used to identify and correct for such errors. Methods We collated summary association statistics from fatty acid and cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and subjected the collated data to a comprehensive QC pipeline. We identified metadata errors through comparison of study-specific statistics to external reference data sets (the National Human Genome Research Institute-European Bioinformatics Institute GWAS catalogue and 1000 genome super populations) and other analytical issues through comparison of reported to expected genetic effect sizes. Comparisons were based on three sets of genetic variants: (i) GWAS hits for fatty acids, (ii) GWAS hits for cancer and (iii) a 1000 genomes reference set. Results We collated summary data from 6 fatty acid and 54 cancer GWAS. Metadata errors and analytical issues with the potential to introduce substantial bias were identified in seven studies (11.6%). After resolving metadata errors and analytical issues, we created a data set of 219 842 genetic associations with 90 cancer types, generated in analyses of 566 665 cancer cases and 1 622 374 controls. Conclusions In this large MR collaboration, 11.6% of included studies were affected by a substantial metadata error or analytical issue. By increasing the integrity of collated summary data prior to their analysis, our protocol can be used to increase the reliability of downstream MR analyses. Our pipeline is available to other researchers via the CheckSumStats package (https://github.com/MRCIEU/CheckSumStats).