Anderson, Lesley

Abstract Background: Over 20 susceptibility single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) have been identified for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its precursor, Barrett esophagus (BE), explaining a small portion of heritability. Methods: Using genetic data from 4,323 BE and 4,116 EAC patients aggregated by international consortia including the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON), we conducted a comprehensive transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) for BE/EAC, leveraging Genotype Tissue Expression (GTEx) gene-expression data from six tissue types of plausible relevance to EAC etiology: mucosa and muscularis from the esophagus, gastroesophageal (GE) junction, stomach, whole blood, and visceral adipose. Two analytical approaches were taken: standard TWAS using the predicted gene expression from local expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL), and set-based SKAT association using selected eQTLs that predict the gene expression. Results: Although the standard approach did not identify significant signals, the eQTL set–based approach identified eight novel associations, three of which were validated in independent external data (eQTL SNP sets for EXOC3, ZNF641, and HSP90AA1). Conclusions: This study identified novel genetic susceptibility loci for EAC and BE using an eQTL set–based genetic association approach. Impact: This study expanded the pool of genetic susceptibility loci for EAC and BE, suggesting the potential of the eQTL set–based genetic association approach as an alternative method for TWAS analysis.

Background: The COVID pandemic has resulted in significant changes many aspects of daily living. To understand the impact that COVID-19 has had on the myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patient population, we conducted an internet based survey. Methods: Survey: This survey was hosted Mayo Clinic's secured REDCap system for online surveys with a link to the survey alongside a brief description posted via the www.mpnqol.com website, as well as other MPN organizational partners. Survey responses were completely anonymous. Questions included MPN-Total symptom score (TSS), NCCN distress thermometer (NCCN-DT), questions regarding impact on medical care, and questions from CDC COVID-19 community survey question bank regarding the impact of social distancing as well as changes in health behaviors. Distress thermometer, MPN-TSS, and/or questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on MPN treatment were analyzed by: MPN diagnosis, among those with ET, PV, or MF diagnoses; medication status; stay at home order; community spread; and country. Associations were tested using Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon rank sum tests (for continuous variables) or Fisher Exact tests (for categorical variables). Analysis: Results: Patient Demographics (Table 1): 1560 people responded to the survey, 1217 were eligible for analysis. Median age was 62 (range: 21-93), and 298 (24.6%) respondents were male. There were respondents from USA, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Ireland, and UK. 233 patients (19.2%) have myelofibrosis, 419 (34.6%) polycythemia vera and 543 (44.8%) essential thrombocythemia. At the time of the COVID outbreak, 1026 (84.3%) were on MPN directed medical therapy, including ruxolitinib (15.3%), interferon (14.7%), hydroxyurea (42.7%) and ASA (47.7%). 165 (13.6%) respondents received COVID testing, of which 5 had positive tests. Impact on MPN Care (Table 2): We sought to understand how patient's clinical care changed. Over half respondents who spoke to their MPN doctor had a telemedicine visit after COVID19 (57.1%). 422 (36.5%) patients spaced out visits, of which 99 (22.7%) felt there were consequences. A change in therapy due to COVID-1 occurred in only 5.4% of patients. MPN Symptom Burden and QoL: Data captured on the NCCN-DT had a median of 4 (0-10). MPN-SAF-TSS composite score was collected in 1150 respondents, median score was 26 (0-90). These scores are higher than those previously reported. Pandemic Impact on Lifestyle (Table 1): 595 (49.5%) of patients report living in a community where there is significant COVID-19 spread. 946 (78.9%) reported that COVID-19 has impacted their day to day life. 198 (17.2%) of patients agreed, or strongly agreed that COVID had a significant impact on their finances. 799 (67.8%) had a stay at home order. Of those who quarantined (112), the median duration was 30d (1-120). The majority of people increased hand-washing, and cleaning habits. 954 (81.7%) respondents reported wearing masks in public. 908 (76.8%) reported increased stress from social distancing. The majority of respondents report using healthy coping habits, such as reaching out to friends/loved ones, breathing and relaxation, as well as healthy diet. Less than 15% of patients report unhealthy coping strategies, such as use of opioids, benzodiazepines, alcohol, or cannabis Factors associated with response: There were no differences in responses based on type of MPN. If a patient was on medication, they were more likely to have spoken to their provider (p<0.001). If there was a stay at home order in place, there was a higher MPN-TSS score (p<0.001). If the respondent lived in an area of high community spread, they had a higher NCCN-DT score (p<0.001). Patients in the USA had a higher NCCN-DT score (p=0.001), were more likely to stretch out the duration of time between visits (p<0.001) and less likely to have a telemedicine visit (p<0.001). Although fewer respondents in the USA thought COVID-19 was a serious disease (p=0.02), a higher percentage of respondents wore masks (p <0.001). Conclusions: In our survey of MPN patients, there were many changes noted in clinical care. The use of telemedicine was common, and at least a third had significant changes in their care. Most experienced increased stress, however, employed healthy coping strategies. Only a minority of patients had a COVID test, and only 5 were positive, further data will be needed to understand the impact of COVID infection. Figure 1 Disclosures Harrison: Roche: Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pemmaraju:Affymetrix: Other: Grant Support, Research Funding; Plexxikon: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria; Roche Diagnostics: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SagerStrong Foundation: Other: Grant Support; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MustangBio: Honoraria; LFB Biotechnologies: Honoraria; Pacylex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Mascarenhas:Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Shimoda:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Perseus Proteomics: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia Japan: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Merck & Co.: Research Funding; CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire plc: Honoraria; Asahi Kasei Medical: Research Funding; Japanese Society of Hematology: Research Funding; The Shinnihon Foundation of Advanced Medical Treatment Research: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komatsu:AbbVie: Other: member of safety assessment committee in M13-834 clinical trial.; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shire Japan KK, Novartis Pharma KK, PharmaEssentia Japan KK, Fuso Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Fujifilm Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutica: Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd.: Patents & Royalties: PCT/JP2020/008434, Research Funding; PPMX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., PharmaEssentia Japan KK, AbbVie GK, Celgene KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK, Japan Tobacco Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK: Speakers Bureau. Abello:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dr. Reddy's: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gomez-Almaguer:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Scherber:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mauro:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Sun Pharma/SPARC: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding. Mesa:Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding.

Abstract Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its precursor, Barrett’s esophagus (BE), have uncovered significant genetic components of risk, but most heritability remains unexplained. Targeted assessment of genetic variation in biologically relevant pathways using novel analytical approaches may identify missed susceptibility signals. Central obesity, a key BE/EAC risk factor, is linked to systemic inflammation, altered hormonal signaling and insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis dysfunction. Here, we assessed IGF-related genetic variation and risk of BE and EAC. Principal component analysis was employed to evaluate pathway-level and gene-level associations with BE/EAC, using genotypes for 270 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in or near 12 IGF-related genes, ascertained from 3295 BE cases, 2515 EAC cases and 3207 controls in the Barrett’s and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON) GWAS. Gene-level signals were assessed using Multi-marker Analysis of GenoMic Annotation (MAGMA) and SNP summary statistics from BEACON and an expanded GWAS meta-analysis (6167 BE cases, 4112 EAC cases, 17 159 controls). Global variation in the IGF pathway was associated with risk of BE (P = 0.0015). Gene-level associations with BE were observed for GHR (growth hormone receptor; P = 0.00046, false discovery rate q = 0.0056) and IGF1R (IGF1 receptor; P = 0.0090, q = 0.0542). These gene-level signals remained significant at q < 0.1 when assessed using data from the largest available BE/EAC GWAS meta-analysis. No significant associations were observed for EAC. This study represents the most comprehensive evaluation to date of inherited genetic variation in the IGF pathway and BE/EAC risk, providing novel evidence that variation in two genes encoding cell-surface receptors, GHR and IGF1R, may influence risk of BE.

AbstractDespite the identification of acquired genetic mutations associated with Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPNs) there is a paucity of information relating to modifiable risk factors that may lead to these mutations. The MOSAICC Study was an exploratory case‐control study of polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and Myelofibrosis (MF). MPN patients and population controls (identified by General Practitioners) and non‐blood relative/friend controls were recruited from 2 large UK centers. Participants completed a telephone‐based questionnaire analyzed by unconditional logistic regression analysis adjusting for potential confounders. Risk factors for MPNs identified included increasing childhood household density [odds ratio (OR) 2.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16–5.62], low childhood socioeconomic status (OR 2.30, 95%CI 1.02–5.18) and high pack years smoking (OR 2.19, 95%CI 1.03–4.66) and current smoking restricted to JAK2 positive PV cases (OR 3.73, 95%CI 1.06–13.15). Obesity was linked with ET (OR 2.59, 95%CI 1.02–6.58) confirming results in previous cohort studies. Receipt of multiple CT scans was associated with a strongly increased risk of MPN although with wide confidence intervals (OR 5.38, 95%CI 1.67–17.3). Alcohol intake was inversely associated with risk of PV (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.19–0.92) and ET (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.24–0.98). The associations with childhood household density, high pack years smoking and alcohol were also seen in multivariate analysis. This is the largest case control study in MPNs to date and confirms the previously reported associations with obesity and cigarette smoking from cohort studies in addition to novel associations. In particular, the role of smoking and JAK2 mutation cases merits further evaluation.

Abstract Introduction The Classic Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPNs), characterised by an over production of one or more cells of the myeloid lineage, are classified into polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). Despite the identification of numerous genetic mutations, a paucity of information relating to medical and lifestyle factors contributing to the aetiology of these diseases remains. Methods The MOSAICC Study was an exploratory case-control study of MPNs. MPN patients were recruited between two sites, Belfast and Southampton, in preparation for a planned UK-wide investigation. Population controls (identified by General Practitioners) and non-blood relative/friend controls were also recruited. Participants completed a telephone-based questionnaire seeking information on a range of medical, environmental, lifestyle and occupational risk factors. Risk factors were assessed using unconditional logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. Results Risk factors identified included smoking [≥25 pack years vs. never: odds ratio (OR) 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-7.87], increasing childhood household density [>2 vs <1 Child(ren)/room: OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.31-8.30], history of heart disease (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.23-8.87), CT scans (≥3 vs. none: OR 4.92, 95% CI 1.55-15.67), having an implant (OR 10.77, 95% CI 1.01-3.10), and pig ownership (OR 5.92, 95% CI 1.17-29.92). Alcohol was associated with a reduced risk of MPNs (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.88) as was home working on car exhausts (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.88), painting at home (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.86) and short haul air travel (p for trend 0.012). Participants working in occupations with high exposure to environmental tobacco smoke had an excess risk of MPN (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.12-5.37). Work-based radiation and solvent exposure also appeared to increase risk of MPNs (p<0.05). Conclusions This exploratory study has confirmed a reported association between cigarette smoking and MPNs. It has identified some potential novel risk factors including work-based radiation and solvent exposure. The findings of this study need to be replicated in a larger, adequately powered, study in order to identify important risk factors for the classic MPNs. Conflict of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments: The MOSAICC Study team acknowledges the support of the National Institute for Health Research, through the Northern Ireland Cancer Research Network (NICRN) and for Southampton the Central South Coast Cancer Network (CSCCN). The team thank those who have participated in the MOSAICC study and the personnel who assisted in the recruitment of patients. Disclosures Mesa: CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) including polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) are rare diseases which contribute to significant morbidity. Symptom management is a prime objective in MPN treatment but current symptom assessment tools have not been validated compared to the general population. Materials and Methods: The MPN Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) is a reliable and validated clinical tool used to assess MPN symptom burden. The MPN-SAF was administered to MPN patients (n=106) and, for the first time, General Practice and non-blood relative/family controls (n=124) as part of a UK pilot case-control study. Mean scores for individual MPN-SAF items and for the Total Symptom Score were previously compared between cases and controls adjusting for potential confounding variables (Anderson LA, et al. Am J Hematol. 2015). The current analysis employed linear discriminant analysis (a multivariate technique) to compare MPN-10 symptom profiles between controls and cases, and between controls and patient groups by MPN diagnosis (ET n=55, PV n=37, PMF n=14). Results: MPN patients as a single group had significantly different MPN-10 symptom profiles compared to controls (multivariate analysis of variance [MANOVA] p<0.001). Discriminant loadings which represent correlations between each individual MPN-10 item and the single significant canonical variable were >0.30 for all MPN-10 items, and >0.50 for weight loss, fatigue, night sweats, bone pain, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, concentration problems, and itching. This suggests that all MPN-10 items contribute to distinguishing between patients and controls. The linear discriminate function correctly categorized 72% of all subjects. When considering patients by diagnosis, MPN-10 symptom profiles significantly differed across patients with ET, PV, and PMF and controls (MANOVA p<0.001). Three canonical variables were significant, with discriminant loadings of the first canonical variable being >0.50 for the same MPN-10 items as the previous analysis; of the second canonical variable for fever; and of the third canonical variable for bone pain. This suggests that MPN-10 items are broadly useful in differentiating between patients and controls, with particular symptoms (e.g., fever and bone pain) contributing to differentiating between patients with different diagnoses. The linear discriminate function correctly categorized 58% of all subjects. Conclusions: MPN patients experience significant morbidity when compared to the general population highlighting the need to manage symptoms effectively. Symptom profiles can not only distinguish MPN patients from general population participants, but also distinguish among patients with ET, PV, and PMF. The results further validate the use of the MPN-SAF as a discriminatory tool to assess MPN symptomatic disease burden. The MOSAICC Study team acknowledges the support of the National Institute for Health Research, through the Northern Ireland Cancer Research Network (NICRN) and for Southampton the Central South Coast Cancer Network (CSCCN). Disclosures Mesa: Novartis. Research- incyte, Gilead, cti, Genentech, promedior, NS Pharma: Consultancy.

The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) including polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) are rare diseases contributing to significant morbidity. Symptom management is a prime treatment objective but current symptom assessment tools have not been validated compared to the general population. The MPN‐symptom assessment form (MPN‐SAF), a reliable and validated clinical tool to assess MPN symptom burden, was administered to MPN patients (n = 106) and, for the first time, population controls (n = 124) as part of a UK case–control study. Mean symptom scores were compared between patients and controls adjusting for potential confounders. Mean patient scores were compared to data collected by the Mayo Clinic, USA on 1,446 international MPN patients to determine patient group representativeness. MPN patients had significantly higher mean scores than controls for 25 of the 26 symptoms measured (P < 0.05); fatigue was the most common symptom (92.4% and 78.1%, respectively). Female MPN patients suffered worse symptom burden than male patients (P < 0.001) and substantially worse burden than female controls (P < 0.001). Compared to the Mayo clinic patients, MPN‐UK patients reported similar symptom burden but lower satiety (P = 0.046). Patients with PMF reported the worst symptom burden (88.3%); significantly higher than PV patients (P < 0.001). For the first time we report quality of life was worse in MPN‐UK patients compared with controls (P < 0.001). Am. J. Hematol. 90:864–870, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are a heterogeneous group of diseases including polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary(idiopathic) myelofibrosis (PMF). In this systematic review, we provide a comprehensive report on the incidence and prevalence of MPNs across the globe. Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science) were searched from their inception to August 2012 for articles reporting MPN incidence or prevalence rates. A random effects meta‐analysis was undertaken to produce combined incidence rates for PV, ET, and PMF. Both heterogeneity and small study bias were assessed. Thirty‐four studies were included. Reported annual incidence rates ranged from 0.01 to 2.61, 0.21 to 2.27, and 0.22 to 0.99 per 100,000 for PV, ET, and PMF, respectively. The combined annual incidence rates for PV, ET, and PMF were 0.84, 1.03, and 0.47 per 100,000. There was high heterogeneity across disease entities (I2 97.1–99.8%) and evidence of publication bias for ET and PMF (Egger test, P = 0.007 and P ≤ 0.001, respectively).The pooled incidence reflects the rarity of MPNs. The calculated pooled incidence rates do not reflect MPN incidence across the globe due to the high unexplained heterogeneity. Improved, widespread registration of MPNs would provide better information for global comparison of the incidence and prevalence of MPNs. Am. J. Hematol. 89:581–587, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.