Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia

ABSTRACTGenes that alter disease risk only in combination with certain environmental exposures may not be detected in genetic association analysis. By using methods accounting for gene‐environment (G × E) interaction, we aimed to identify novel genetic loci associated with breast cancer risk. Up to 34,475 cases and 34,786 controls of European ancestry from up to 23 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium were included. Overall, 71,527 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), enriched for association with breast cancer, were tested for interaction with 10 environmental risk factors using three recently proposed hybrid methods and a joint test of association and interaction. Analyses were adjusted for age, study, population stratification, and confounding factors as applicable. Three SNPs in two independent loci showed statistically significant association: SNPs rs10483028 and rs2242714 in perfect linkage disequilibrium on chromosome 21 and rs12197388 in ARID1B on chromosome 6. While rs12197388 was identified using the joint test with parity and with age at menarche (P‐values = 3 × 10−07), the variants on chromosome 21 q22.12, which showed interaction with adult body mass index (BMI) in 8,891 postmenopausal women, were identified by all methods applied. SNP rs10483028 was associated with breast cancer in women with a BMI below 25 kg/m2 (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.15–1.38) but not in women with a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or higher (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.72–1.11, P for interaction = 3.2 × 10−05). Our findings confirm comparable power of the recent methods for detecting G × E interaction and the utility of using G × E interaction analyses to identify new susceptibility loci.

Abstract Part of the substantial unexplained familial aggregation of breast cancer may be due to interactions between common variants, but few studies have had adequate statistical power to detect interactions of realistic magnitude. We aimed to assess all two-way interactions in breast cancer susceptibility between 70 917 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) selected primarily based on prior evidence of a marginal effect. Thirty-eight international studies contributed data for 46 450 breast cancer cases and 42 461 controls of European origin as part of a multi-consortium project (COGS). First, SNPs were preselected based on evidence (P < 0.01) of a per-allele main effect, and all two-way combinations of those were evaluated by a per-allele (1 d.f.) test for interaction using logistic regression. Second, all 2.5 billion possible two-SNP combinations were evaluated using Boolean operation-based screening and testing, and SNP pairs with the strongest evidence of interaction (P < 10−4) were selected for more careful assessment by logistic regression. Under the first approach, 3277 SNPs were preselected, but an evaluation of all possible two-SNP combinations (1 d.f.) identified no interactions at P < 10−8. Results from the second analytic approach were consistent with those from the first (P > 10−10). In summary, we observed little evidence of two-way SNP interactions in breast cancer susceptibility, despite the large number of SNPs with potential marginal effects considered and the very large sample size. This finding may have important implications for risk prediction, simplifying the modelling required. Further comprehensive, large-scale genome-wide interaction studies may identify novel interacting loci if the inherent logistic and computational challenges can be overcome.

Abstract Background: Ovarian cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death among women. In an effort to understand contributors to disease outcome, we evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) previously associated with ovarian cancer recurrence or survival, specifically in angiogenesis, inflammation, mitosis, and drug disposition genes. Methods: Twenty-seven SNPs in VHL, HGF, IL18, PRKACB, ABCB1, CYP2C8, ERCC2, and ERCC1 previously associated with ovarian cancer outcome were genotyped in 10,084 invasive cases from 28 studies from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium with over 37,000-observed person-years and 4,478 deaths. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the association between candidate SNPs and ovarian cancer recurrence or survival with and without adjustment for key covariates. Results: We observed no association between genotype and ovarian cancer recurrence or survival for any of the SNPs examined. Conclusions: These results refute prior associations between these SNPs and ovarian cancer outcome and underscore the importance of maximally powered genetic association studies. Impact: These variants should not be used in prognostic models. Alternate approaches to uncovering inherited prognostic factors, if they exist, are needed. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 22(5); 987–. ©2013 AACR.

Abstract Background: There are several well-established environmental risk factors for ovarian cancer, and recent genome-wide association studies have also identified six variants that influence disease risk. However, the interplay between such risk factors and susceptibility loci has not been studied. Methods: Data from 14 ovarian cancer case–control studies were pooled, and stratified analyses by each environmental risk factor with tests for heterogeneity were conducted to determine the presence of interactions for all histologic subtypes. A genetic “risk score” was created to consider the effects of all six variants simultaneously. A multivariate model was fit to examine the association between all environmental risk factors and genetic risk score on ovarian cancer risk. Results: Among 7,374 controls and 5,566 cases, there was no statistical evidence of interaction between the six SNPs or genetic risk score and the environmental risk factors on ovarian cancer risk. In a main effects model, women in the highest genetic risk score quartile had a 65% increased risk of ovarian cancer compared with women in the lowest [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.48–1.84]. Analyses by histologic subtype yielded risk differences across subtype for endometriosis (Phet < 0.001), parity (Phet < 0.01), and tubal ligation (Phet = 0.041). Conclusions: The lack of interactions suggests that a multiplicative model is the best fit for these data. Under such a model, we provide a robust estimate of the effect of each risk factor that sets the stage for absolute risk prediction modeling that considers both environmental and genetic risk factors. Further research into the observed differences in risk across histologic subtype is warranted. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 22(5); 880–90. ©2013 AACR.

Abstract Rare germline mutations in the breast and ovarian cancer predisposition genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are present in roughly 5 percent of ovarian cancer patients. Both genes play key roles in DNA damage repair but appear to have distinct, although often complementary, functions. The risks of breast and ovarian cancer have been shown to differ between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, and mutation-specific effects have also been suggested for both groups. Published reports comparing the survival of ovarian cancer patients with and without BRCA1/2 mutations generally show a survival advantage among mutation carriers. This is thought to be related to an improved response of carriers to platinum-based therapies. Since it is not known whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers show similar survival patterns, we have performed a large, multicenter study to investigate the impact of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations on ovarian cancer survival. 3,531 invasive epithelial ovarian cancer cases (1,178 BRCA1, 367 BRCA2 and 1,986 BRCA-negative) with survival time data from twenty-four studies in the U.S.A, Europe, Israel and Asia were included. In our main analysis, we excluded patients who were known or who were likely to have not received platinum-based therapy. Compared to non-carriers, BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers were more likely to present with advanced stage (BRCA1; p=2×10−4, BRCA2; p=4×10−6), high grade (BRCA1; p=4×10−9, BRCA2; p=1×10−4), serous disease (BRCA1; p=3×10−6, BRCA2; p=0.003). BRCA1 carriers were younger at diagnosis (p=2×10−9) and BRCA2 slightly older at diagnosis (p=0.002) than non-carriers. BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers did not differ in terms of tumor stage, grade or histology but did show differences in the age at diagnosis (p=2×10−14). In an unadjusted analysis, neither BRCA1 nor BRCA2 carriers differed from non-carriers in overall survival (BRCA1: HR=1.02, p=0.77, BRCA2: HR=0.89, p=0.36). After adjusting for stage, grade, histology and age at diagnosis, BRCA1 carriers showed a modest, non-significant, survival advantage (HR=0.84, p=0.12) while BRCA2 carriers showed a marked improvement (HR=0.57, p=6×10−4) compared to non-carriers. This survival advantage was also seen when comparing BRCA2 carriers to BRCA1 carriers after adjustment for age at diagnosis (HR=0.69, p=5×10−4). Similar results were obtained when we restricted the analysis to high grade, advanced stage, serous cases. The survival differences we observed between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers could be related to differences in tumor biology or chemo-sensitivity. Additional analyses investigating the later will be presented in addition to mutation-specific effects within BRCA1 and BRCA2. In this study, we provide strong evidence for genetic heterogeneity of survival effects in ovarian cancer patients with BRCA mutations. This could be applied to both clinical prediction and to aid our understanding of the complex biology of BRCA mutations. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2752. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-2752

Abstract We performed a multi-stage genome-wide association study (GWAS) for drug response in ovarian cancer. We selected 313 chemotherapy treated patients from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study (AOCS). Patients were treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin and the trait of interest was Progression Free Survival (PFS). We maximized power for a fixed genotyping budget by genotyping individuals from the tails of the distribution: 94 with good survival and 94 with poor survival, taking into account extent of residual disease following surgery. Patients were genotyped on Illumina HumanOmni1-Quad arrays (1140419 loci).Two further cohorts with measures of PFS and whole genome data available; 134 ovarian patients from the Mayo clinic (genotyped on Illumina HumanHap 610 arrays, 620901 loci) and 68 patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas ovarian cancer set (genotyped on Illumina Human1M arrays, 1199187 loci) were meta-analyzed with the AOCS set (stage 1). We have imputed all the stage 1 samples with reference of the 1000 Genome data to allow more direct comparison of SNPs not common to all of the arrays used (up to 6 million SNPs with good imputation quality). Based on the chemotherapy treatment received by each patient, we assigned the patients into primary and secondary analysis, with primary analysis using a more strictly defined treatment subgroup. We followed up the stage 1 findings by genotyping 26 SNPs in more than 3,000 samples collected from 8 study sites of Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC). These 26 SNPs were mainly genotyped SNPs, chosen from 23 distinct regions showing the strongest association with chemotherapy response from either primary or secondary analysis. 2 SNPs showed nominal significance in the replication sample (chr 12: rs1861932, chr 22: rs708444). We are currently genotyping more regions to seek replication of the initial findings. In summary, we sought to identify genes that underlie individual differences in chemoresistance. In the future, typing variations in these genes will be important for personalizing drug regimes for patients. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 4679. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-4679

Abstract Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) identified variants at 19p13.1 and ZNF365 (10q21.2) as risk factors for breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. We explored associations with ovarian cancer and with breast cancer by tumor histopathology for these variants in mutation carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Methods: Genotyping data for 12,599 BRCA1 and 7,132 BRCA2 mutation carriers from 40 studies were combined. Results: We confirmed associations between rs8170 at 19p13.1 and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers [HR, 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07–1.27; P = 7.42 × 10−4] and between rs16917302 at ZNF365 (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73–0.97; P = 0.017) but not rs311499 at 20q13.3 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.94–1.31; P = 0.22) and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers. Analyses based on tumor histopathology showed that 19p13 variants were predominantly associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, whereas rs16917302 at ZNF365 was mainly associated with ER-positive breast cancer for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We also found for the first time that rs67397200 at 19p13.1 was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer for BRCA1 (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.05–1.29; P = 3.8 × 10−4) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10–1.52; P = 1.8 × 10−3). Conclusions: 19p13.1 and ZNF365 are susceptibility loci for ovarian cancer and ER subtypes of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Impact: These findings can lead to an improved understanding of tumor development and may prove useful for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 21(4); 645–57. ©2012 AACR.

Abstract The 19p13.1 breast cancer susceptibility locus is a modifier of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers and is also associated with the risk of ovarian cancer. Here, we investigated 19p13.1 variation and risk of breast cancer subtypes, defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status, using 48,869 breast cancer cases and 49,787 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). Variants from 19p13.1 were not associated with breast cancer overall or with ER-positive breast cancer but were significantly associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk [rs8170 OR, 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.05–1.15; P = 3.49 × 10−5] and triple-negative (ER-, PR-, and HER2-negative) breast cancer (rs8170: OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13–1.31; P = 2.22 × 10−7). However, rs8170 was no longer associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk when triple-negative cases were excluded (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89–1.07; P = 0.62). In addition, a combined analysis of triple-negative cases from BCAC and the Triple Negative Breast Cancer Consortium (TNBCC; N = 3,566) identified a genome-wide significant association between rs8170 and triple-negative breast cancer risk (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18–1.33; P = 3.31 × 10−13]. Thus, 19p13.1 is the first triple-negative–specific breast cancer risk locus and the first locus specific to a histologic subtype defined by ER, PR, and HER2 to be identified. These findings provide convincing evidence that genetic susceptibility to breast cancer varies by tumor subtype and that triple-negative tumors and other subtypes likely arise through distinct etiologic pathways. Cancer Res; 72(7); 1795–803. ©2012 AACR.

Abstract Background: The single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) 5p12-rs10941679 has been found to be associated with risk of breast cancer, particularly estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease. We aimed to further explore this association overall, and by tumor histopathology, in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Methods: Data were combined from 37 studies, including 40,972 invasive cases, 1,398 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and 46,334 controls, all of white European ancestry, as well as 3,007 invasive cases and 2,337 controls of Asian ancestry. Associations overall and by tumor invasiveness and histopathology were assessed using logistic regression. Results: For white Europeans, the per-allele OR associated with 5p12-rs10941679 was 1.11 (95% CI = 1.08–1.14, P = 7 × 10−18) for invasive breast cancer and 1.10 (95% CI = 1.01–1.21, P = 0.03) for DCIS. For Asian women, the estimated OR for invasive disease was similar (OR = 1.07, 95%CI = 0.99–1.15, P = 0.09). Further analyses suggested that the association in white Europeans was largely limited to progesterone receptor (PR)-positive disease (per-allele OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.12–1.20, P = 1 × 10−18 vs. OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.99–1.07, P = 0.2 for PR-negative disease; Pheterogeneity = 2 × 10−7); heterogeneity by ER status was not observed (P = 0.2) once PR status was accounted for. The association was also stronger for lower grade tumors [per-allele OR (95% CI) = 1.20 (1.14–1.25), 1.13 (1.09–1.16), and 1.04 (0.99–1.08) for grade 1, 2, and 3/4, respectively; Ptrend = 5 × 10−7]. Conclusion: 5p12 is a breast cancer susceptibility locus for PR-positive, lower grade breast cancer. Impact: Multicenter fine-mapping studies of this region are needed as a first step to identifying the causal variant or variants. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(10); 2222–31. ©2011 AACR.