Guénel, Pascal

Background Polygenic risk score (PRS), calculated based on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), can improve breast cancer (BC) risk assessment. To date, most BC GWASs have been performed in individuals of European (EUR) ancestry, and the generalisation of EUR-based PRS to other populations is a major challenge. In this study, we examined the performance of EUR-based BC PRS models in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods We generated PRSs based on data on EUR women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We tested the performance of the PRSs in a cohort of 2161 AJ women from Israel (1437 cases and 724 controls) from BCAC (BCAC cohort from Israel (BCAC-IL)). In addition, we tested the performance of these EUR-based BC PRSs, as well as the established 313-SNP EUR BC PRS, in an independent cohort of 181 AJ women from Hadassah Medical Center (HMC) in Israel. Results In the BCAC-IL cohort, the highest OR per 1 SD was 1.56 (±0.09). The OR for AJ women at the top 10% of the PRS distribution compared with the middle quintile was 2.10 (±0.24). In the HMC cohort, the OR per 1 SD of the EUR-based PRS that performed best in the BCAC-IL cohort was 1.58±0.27. The OR per 1 SD of the commonly used 313-SNP BC PRS was 1.64 (±0.28). Conclusions Extant EUR GWAS data can be used for generating PRSs that identify AJ women with markedly elevated risk of BC and therefore hold promise for improving BC risk assessment in AJ women.

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.

Abstract Background Epidemiological studies that examined the association between Parkinson's disease (PD) and cancers led to inconsistent results, but they face a number of methodological difficulties. Objective We used results from genome‐wide association studies (GWASs) to study the genetic correlation between PD and different cancers to identify common genetic risk factors. Methods We used individual data for participants of European ancestry from the Courage‐PD (Comprehensive Unbiased Risk Factor Assessment for Genetics and Environment in Parkinson's Disease; PD, N = 16,519) and EPITHYR (differentiated thyroid cancer, N = 3527) consortia and summary statistics of GWASs from iPDGC (International Parkinson Disease Genomics Consortium; PD, N = 482,730), Melanoma Meta‐Analysis Consortium (MMAC), Breast Cancer Association Consortium (breast cancer), the Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer Associated Alterations in the Genome (prostate cancer), International Lung Cancer Consortium (lung cancer), and Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (ovarian cancer) (N comprised between 36,017 and 228,951 for cancer GWASs). We estimated the genetic correlation between PD and cancers using linkage disequilibrium score regression. We studied the association between PD and polymorphisms associated with cancers, and vice versa, using cross‐phenotypes polygenic risk score (PRS) analyses. Results We confirmed a previously reported positive genetic correlation of PD with melanoma (G corr = 0.16 [0.04; 0.28]) and reported an additional significant positive correlation of PD with prostate cancer (G corr = 0.11 [0.03; 0.19]). There was a significant inverse association between the PRS for ovarian cancer and PD (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89 [0.84; 0.94]). Conversely, the PRS of PD was positively associated with breast cancer (OR = 1.08 [1.06; 1.10]) and inversely associated with ovarian cancer (OR = 0.95 [0.91; 0.99]). The association between PD and ovarian cancer was mostly driven by rs183211 located in an intron of the NSF gene (17q21.31). Conclusions We show evidence in favor of a contribution of pleiotropic genes to the association between PD and specific cancers. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

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.

In this study we aim to examine gene–environment interactions (GxEs) between genes involved with estrogen metabolism and environmental factors related to estrogen exposure. GxE analyses were conducted with 1970 Korean breast cancer cases and 2052 controls in the case-control study, the Seoul Breast Cancer Study (SEBCS). A total of 11,555 SNPs from the 137 candidate genes were included in the GxE analyses with eight established environmental factors. A replication test was conducted by using an independent population from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC), with 62,485 Europeans and 9047 Asians. The GxE tests were performed by using two-step methods in GxEScan software. Two interactions were found in the SEBCS. The first interaction was shown between rs13035764 of NCOA1 and age at menarche in the GE|2df model (p-2df = 1.2 × 10−3). The age at menarche before 14 years old was associated with the high risk of breast cancer, and the risk was higher when subjects had homozygous minor allele G. The second GxE was shown between rs851998 near ESR1 and height in the GE|2df model (p-2df = 1.1 × 10−4). Height taller than 160 cm was associated with a high risk of breast cancer, and the risk increased when the minor allele was added. The findings were not replicated in the BCAC. These results would suggest specificity in Koreans for breast cancer risk.

Abstract Background: It is not known whether modifiable lifestyle factors that predict survival after invasive breast cancer differ by subtype. Methods: We analyzed data for 121,435 women diagnosed with breast cancer from 67 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium with 16,890 deaths (8,554 breast cancer specific) over 10 years. Cox regression was used to estimate associations between risk factors and 10-year all-cause mortality and breast cancer–specific mortality overall, by estrogen receptor (ER) status, and by intrinsic-like subtype. Results: There was no evidence of heterogeneous associations between risk factors and mortality by subtype (Padj > 0.30). The strongest associations were between all-cause mortality and BMI ≥30 versus 18.5–25 kg/m2 [HR (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19 (1.06–1.34)]; current versus never smoking [1.37 (1.27–1.47)], high versus low physical activity [0.43 (0.21–0.86)], age ≥30 years versus <20 years at first pregnancy [0.79 (0.72–0.86)]; >0–<5 years versus ≥10 years since last full-term birth [1.31 (1.11–1.55)]; ever versus never use of oral contraceptives [0.91 (0.87–0.96)]; ever versus never use of menopausal hormone therapy, including current estrogen–progestin therapy [0.61 (0.54–0.69)]. Similar associations with breast cancer mortality were weaker; for example, 1.11 (1.02–1.21) for current versus never smoking. Conclusions: We confirm associations between modifiable lifestyle factors and 10-year all-cause mortality. There was no strong evidence that associations differed by ER status or intrinsic-like subtype. Impact: Given the large dataset and lack of evidence that associations between modifiable risk factors and 10-year mortality differed by subtype, these associations could be cautiously used in prognostication models to inform patient-centered care.

Abstract We evaluated the joint associations between a new 313-variant PRS (PRS313) and questionnaire-based breast cancer risk factors for women of European ancestry, using 72 284 cases and 80 354 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Interactions were evaluated using standard logistic regression and a newly developed case-only method for breast cancer risk overall and by estrogen receptor status. After accounting for multiple testing, we did not find evidence that per-standard deviation PRS313 odds ratio differed across strata defined by individual risk factors. Goodness-of-fit tests did not reject the assumption of a multiplicative model between PRS313 and each risk factor. Variation in projected absolute lifetime risk of breast cancer associated with classical risk factors was greater for women with higher genetic risk (PRS313 and family history) and, on average, 17.5% higher in the highest vs lowest deciles of genetic risk. These findings have implications for risk prevention for women at increased risk of breast cancer.

AbstractPrevious transcriptome‐wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome‐wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype‐specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta‐analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER−). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER− subtypes, using a case‐only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER– breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS‐significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast‐cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS‐significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER− breast cancer.