Chan, Andrew T

Abstract Background: Currently known associations between common genetic variants and colorectal cancer explain less than half of its heritability of 25%. As alcohol consumption has a J-shape association with colorectal cancer risk, nondrinking and heavy drinking are both risk factors for colorectal cancer. Methods: Individual-level data was pooled from the Colon Cancer Family Registry, Colorectal Transdisciplinary Study, and Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium to compare nondrinkers (≤1 g/day) and heavy drinkers (>28 g/day) with light-to-moderate drinkers (1–28 g/day) in GxE analyses. To improve power, we implemented joint 2df and 3df tests and a novel two-step method that modifies the weighted hypothesis testing framework. We prioritized putative causal variants by predicting allelic effects using support vector machine models. Results: For nondrinking as compared with light-to-moderate drinking, the hybrid two-step approach identified 13 significant SNPs with pairwise r2 > 0.9 in the 10q24.2/COX15 region. When stratified by alcohol intake, the A allele of lead SNP rs2300985 has a dose–response increase in risk of colorectal cancer as compared with the G allele in light-to-moderate drinkers [OR for GA genotype = 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06–1.17; OR for AA genotype = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14–1.31], but not in nondrinkers or heavy drinkers. Among the correlated candidate SNPs in the 10q24.2/COX15 region, rs1318920 was predicted to disrupt an HNF4 transcription factor binding motif. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the association with colorectal cancer in 10q24.2/COX15 observed in genome-wide association study is strongest in nondrinkers. We also identified rs1318920 as the putative causal regulatory variant for the region. Impact: The study identifies multifaceted evidence of a possible functional effect for rs1318920.

Abstract Background Glycemic traits—such as hyperinsulinemia, hyperglycemia, and type 2 diabetes—have been associated with higher colorectal cancer risk in observational studies; however, causality of these associations is uncertain. We used Mendelian randomization (MR) to estimate the causal effects of fasting insulin, 2-hour glucose, fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and type 2 diabetes with colorectal cancer. Methods Genome-wide association study summary data were used to identify genetic variants associated with circulating levels of fasting insulin (n = 34), 2-hour glucose (n = 13), fasting glucose (n = 70), HbA1c (n = 221), and type 2 diabetes (n = 268). Using 2-sample MR, we examined these variants in relation to colorectal cancer risk (48 214 case patient and 64 159 control patients). Results In inverse-variance models, higher fasting insulin levels increased colorectal cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] per 1-SD = 1.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.15 to 2.36). We found no evidence of any effect of 2-hour glucose (OR per 1-SD = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.21) or fasting glucose (OR per 1-SD = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.23) concentrations on colorectal cancer risk. Genetic liability to type 2 diabetes (OR per 1-unit increase in log odds = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.07) and higher HbA1c levels (OR per 1-SD = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.19) increased colorectal cancer risk, although these findings may have been biased by pleiotropy. Higher HbA1c concentrations increased rectal cancer risk in men (OR per 1-SD = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.40), but not in women. Conclusions Our results support a causal effect of higher fasting insulin, but not glucose traits or type 2 diabetes, on increased colorectal cancer risk. This suggests that pharmacological or lifestyle interventions that lower circulating insulin levels may be beneficial in preventing colorectal tumorigenesis.

AbstractBackgroundThe incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) among individuals aged younger than 50 years has been increasing. As screening guidelines lower the recommended age of screening initiation, concerns including the burden on screening capacity and costs have been recognized, suggesting that an individualized approach may be warranted. We developed risk prediction models for early-onset CRC that incorporate an environmental risk score (ERS), including 16 lifestyle and environmental factors, and a polygenic risk score (PRS) of 141 variants.MethodsRelying on risk score weights for ERS and PRS derived from studies of CRC at all ages, we evaluated risks for early-onset CRC in 3486 cases and 3890 controls aged younger than 50 years. Relative and absolute risks for early-onset CRC were assessed according to values of the ERS and PRS. The discriminatory performance of these scores was estimated using the covariate-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.ResultsIncreasing values of ERS and PRS were associated with increasing relative risks for early-onset CRC (odds ratio per SD of ERS = 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08 to 1.20; odds ratio per SD of PRS = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.51 to 1.68), both contributing to case-control discrimination (area under the curve = 0.631, 95% CI = 0.615 to 0.647). Based on absolute risks, we can expect 26 excess cases per 10 000 men and 21 per 10 000 women among those scoring at the 90th percentile for both risk scores.ConclusionsPersonal risk scores have the potential to identify individuals at differential relative and absolute risk for early-onset CRC. Improved discrimination may aid in targeted CRC screening of younger, high-risk individuals, potentially improving outcomes.

Objective An understanding of the etiologic heterogeneity of colorectal cancer (CRC) is critical for improving precision prevention, including individualized screening recommendations and the discovery of novel drug targets and repurposable drug candidates for chemoprevention. Known differences in molecular characteristics and environmental risk factors among tumors arising in different locations of the colorectum suggest partly distinct mechanisms of carcinogenesis. The extent to which the contribution of inherited genetic risk factors for CRC differs by anatomical subsite of the primary tumor has not been examined. Design To identify new anatomical subsite-specific risk loci, we performed genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analyses including data of 48 214 CRC cases and 64 159 controls of European ancestry. We characterised effect heterogeneity at CRC risk loci using multinomial modelling. Results We identified 13 loci that reached genome-wide significance (p<5×10 −8 ) and that were not reported by previous GWASs for overall CRC risk. Multiple lines of evidence support candidate genes at several of these loci. We detected substantial heterogeneity between anatomical subsites. Just over half (61) of 109 known and new risk variants showed no evidence for heterogeneity. In contrast, 22 variants showed association with distal CRC (including rectal cancer), but no evidence for association or an attenuated association with proximal CRC. For two loci, there was strong evidence for effects confined to proximal colon cancer. Conclusion Genetic architectures of proximal and distal CRC are partly distinct. Studies of risk factors and mechanisms of carcinogenesis, and precision prevention strategies should take into consideration the anatomical subsite of the tumour.