Lu, Lingeng

Abstract Background: Accumulating evidence suggests a relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Independent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer have identified 16 and 27 risk regions, respectively, four of which overlap between the two cancers. We aimed to identify joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci by performing a meta-analysis of GWAS summary statistics from these two cancers. Methods: Using LDScore regression, we explored the genetic correlation between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. To identify loci associated with the risk of both cancers, we implemented a pipeline of statistical genetic analyses (i.e., inverse-variance meta-analysis, colocalization, and M-values) and performed analyses stratified by subtype. Candidate target genes were then prioritized using functional genomic data. Results: Genetic correlation analysis revealed significant genetic correlation between the two cancers (rG = 0.43, P = 2.66 × 10−5). We found seven loci associated with risk for both cancers (PBonferroni < 2.4 × 10−9). In addition, four novel subgenome-wide regions at 7p22.2, 7q22.1, 9p12, and 11q13.3 were identified (P < 5 × 10−7). Promoter-associated HiChIP chromatin loops from immortalized endometrium and ovarian cell lines and expression quantitative trait loci data highlighted candidate target genes for further investigation. Conclusions: Using cross-cancer GWAS meta-analysis, we have identified several joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci and candidate target genes for future functional analysis. Impact: Our research highlights the shared genetic relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Further studies in larger sample sets are required to confirm our findings.

Abstract Blood lipids have been associated with the development of a range of cancers, including breast, lung and colorectal cancer. For endometrial cancer, observational studies have reported inconsistent associations between blood lipids and cancer risk. To reduce biases from unmeasured confounding, we performed a bidirectional, two‐sample Mendelian randomization analysis to investigate the relationship between levels of three blood lipids (low‐density lipoprotein [LDL] and high‐density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, and triglycerides) and endometrial cancer risk. Genetic variants associated with each of these blood lipid levels ( P < 5 × 10 −8 ) were identified as instrumental variables, and assessed using genome‐wide association study data from the Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium (12 906 cases and 108 979 controls) and the Global Lipids Genetic Consortium (n = 188 578). Mendelian randomization analyses found genetically raised LDL cholesterol levels to be associated with lower risks of endometrial cancer of all histologies combined, and of endometrioid and non‐endometrioid subtypes. Conversely, higher genetically predicted HDL cholesterol levels were associated with increased risk of non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. After accounting for the potential confounding role of obesity (as measured by genetic variants associated with body mass index), the association between genetically predicted increased LDL cholesterol levels and lower endometrial cancer risk remained significant, especially for non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. There was no evidence to support a role for triglycerides in endometrial cancer development. Our study supports a role for LDL and HDL cholesterol in the development of non‐endometrioid endometrial cancer. Further studies are required to understand the mechanisms underlying these findings.

Abstract Background: Nulliparity is an established endometrial cancer risk factor, but whether this association is related to infertility is unclear. Although there are many underlying causes of infertility, few studies have assessed risk relationships according to specific causes. Despite concerns that most treatments induce ovulation and that the endometrium is highly hormonally-responsive, previous studies have provided conflicting results on treatment associations. Methods: To address these issues, we conducted a pooled analysis of 8,151 cases and12,471 controls from 2 cohort and 12 case-control studies conducted in 1982 to 2009 (N. America, Europe, Australia, Asia). All studies provided self-reported infertility, causes and treatments, except for 1 study that relied on data from national registries. Study-specific exposures and covariate data were harmonized across studies. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for study, age, interview year, race, parity, oral contraceptive and menopausal hormone use, and body mass index. If data were not reported for a particular variable, that study was excluded from the variable-specific analysis. Results: Nulliparous women had an elevated endometrial cancer risk compared with parous women (adjusted OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.58-1.90).Women with self-reported infertility also had an increased risk (adjusted OR=1.22; 95% CI: 1.13-1.32) compared with those without infertility issues, even after adjusting for parity; the strongest associations was seen among studies that defined infertility as unsuccessfully trying to conceive for 2+ years (adjusted OR=1.31; 95% CI: 1.07-1.60). Infertility was associated with similar risks among nulliparous (1.22; 1.10-1.48) and parous (1.22; 1.12-1.34) women, although there was no increased risk associated with infertility among those who had given birth to 3+ children. Two infertility causes associated with risk elevation were endometriosis (adjusted OR=2.08; 95% CI: 1.46-2.95 compared with women no infertility problems) and anovulation (adjusted OR=1.40; 95% CI: 1.16-1.70). Based on relatively small numbers, none of the individual treatments (in vitro fertilization, selective estrogen response modulators, gonatropins, progestins, estrogens) were substantially related to risk. Conclusion: Based on mainly self-reported infertility data, we found that parity and infertility independently contribute to endometrial cancer risk, with parity seemingly being the predominant risk predictor. Understanding residual endometrial cancer relationships related to causes of infertility and infertility treatment may benefit from documented medical information on causes of infertility and treatment parameters. Citation Format: Hannah P. Yang, Linda S. Cook, Elisabete Weiderpass, Hans-Olov Adami, Kristin E. Anderson, Hui Cai, James R. Cerhan, Tess Clendenen, Ashley S. Felix, Christine Friedenreich, Montserrat Garcia-Closas, Marc T. Goodman, Xiaolin Liang, Jolanta Lissowska, Lingeng Lu, Anthony M. Magliocco, Susan E. McCann, Kristen B. Moysich, Sara H. Olson, Malcolm C. Pike, Silvia Polidoro, Fulvio Ricceri, Harvey Risch, Carlotta Sacerdote, V. Wendy Setiawan, Xiao Ou Shu, Amanda B. Spurdle, Britton Trabert, Penelope M. Webb, Nicolas Wentzensen, Yong-Bing Xiang, Youming Xu, Herbert Yu, Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte, Louise A. Brinton. Infertility and risk of incident endometrial carcinoma: a pooled analysis from the Epidemiology of Endometrial Cancer Consortium. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 2167. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-2167