Nevanlinna, Heli

ScopeWe reevaluated previously reported associations between variants in pathways of one‐carbon (1‐C) (folate) transfer genes and ovarian carcinoma (OC) risk, and in related pathways of purine and pyrimidine metabolism, and assessed interactions with folate intake.Methods and resultsOdds ratios (OR) for 446 genetic variants were estimated among 13 410 OC cases and 22 635 controls, and among 2281 cases and 3444 controls with folate information. Following multiple testing correction, the most significant main effect associations were for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) variants rs11587873 (OR = 0.92; p = 6 × 10−5) and rs828054 (OR = 1.06; p = 1 × 10−4). Thirteen variants in the pyrimidine metabolism genes, DPYD, DPYS, PPAT, and TYMS, also interacted significantly with folate in a multivariant analysis (corrected p = 9.9 × 10−6) but collectively explained only 0.2% of OC risk. Although no other associations were significant after multiple testing correction, variants in SHMT1 in 1‐C transfer, previously reported with OC, suggested lower risk at higher folate (pinteraction = 0.03–0.006).ConclusionVariation in pyrimidine metabolism genes, particularly DPYD, which was previously reported to be associated with OC, may influence risk; however, stratification by folate intake is unlikely to modify disease risk appreciably in these women. SHMT1 SNP‐by‐folate interactions are plausible but require further validation. Polymorphisms in selected genes in purine metabolism were not associated with OC.

Abstract A missense single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the immune modulatory gene IL1A has been associated with ovarian cancer risk (rs17561). Although the exact mechanism through which this SNP alters risk of ovarian cancer is not clearly understood, rs17561 has also been associated with risk of endometriosis, an epidemiologic risk factor for ovarian cancer. Interleukin-1α (IL1A) is both regulated by and able to activate NF-κB, a transcription factor family that induces transcription of many proinflammatory genes and may be an important mediator in carcinogenesis. We therefore tagged SNPs in more than 200 genes in the NF-κB pathway for a total of 2,282 SNPs (including rs17561) for genotype analysis of 15,604 cases of ovarian cancer in patients of European descent, including 6,179 of high-grade serous (HGS), 2,100 endometrioid, 1,591 mucinous, 1,034 clear cell, and 1,016 low-grade serous, including 23,235 control cases spanning 40 studies in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium. In this large population, we confirmed the association between rs17561 and clear cell ovarian cancer [OR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76–0.93; P = 0.00075], which remained intact even after excluding participants in the prior study (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75–0.95; P = 0.006). Considering a multiple-testing–corrected significance threshold of P < 2.5 × 10−5, only one other variant, the TNFSF10 SNP rs6785617, was associated significantly with a risk of ovarian cancer (low malignant potential tumors OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79–0.91; P = 0.00002). Our results extend the evidence that borderline tumors may have a distinct genetic etiology. Further investigation of how these SNPs might modify ovarian cancer associations with other inflammation-related risk factors is warranted. Cancer Res; 74(3); 852–61. ©2013 AACR.

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 Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) have begun to investigate associations between inherited genetic variations and breast cancer prognosis. Here, we report our findings from a GWAS conducted in 536 patients with early-onset breast cancer aged 40 or less at diagnosis and with a mean follow-up period of 4.1 years (SD = 1.96). Patients were selected from the Prospective Study of Outcomes in Sporadic versus Hereditary breast cancer. A Bonferroni correction for multiple testing determined that a P value of 1.0 × 10−7 was a statistically significant association signal. Following quality control, we identified 487,496 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) for association tests in stage 1. In stage 2, 35 SNPs with the most significant associations were genotyped in 1,516 independent cases from the same early-onset cohort. In stage 2, 11 SNPs remained associated in the same direction (P ≤ 0.05). Fixed effects meta-analysis models identified one SNP associated at close to genome wide level of significance 556 kb upstream of the ARRDC3 locus [HR = 1.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.33–1.96; P = 9.5 × 10−7]. Four further associations at or close to the PBX1, RORα, NTN1, and SYT6 loci also came close to genome-wide significance levels (P = 10−6). In the first ever GWAS for the identification of SNPs associated with prognosis in patients with early-onset breast cancer, we report a SNP upstream of the ARRDC3 locus as potentially associated with prognosis (median follow-up time for genotypes: CC = 4 years, CT = 3 years, and TT = 2.7 years; Wilcoxon rank-sum test CC vs. CT, P = 4 × 10−4 and CT vs. TT, P = 0.76). Four further loci may also be associated with prognosis. Cancer Res; 73(6); 1883–91. ©2012 AACR.

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.