Um, Caroline Y.

Abstract A potential association of endogenous circadian rhythm disruption with risk of cancer development has been suggested, however, epidemiological evidence for the association of sleep traits with colorectal cancer (CRC) is limited and often contradictory. Here we investigated whether genetically predicted chronotype, insomnia and sleep duration are associated with CRC risk in males, females and overall and according to CRC anatomical subsites using Mendelian randomization (MR). The two-sample inverse variance weighted (IVW) method was applied using summary-level data in up to 58,221 CRC cases and 67,694 controls and genome-wide association data of genetic variants for self-reported sleep traits. Secondary analyses using alternative instruments and sensitivity analyses assessing potential violations of MR assumptions were conducted. Genetically predicted morning preference was associated with 13% lower risk of CRC in men (ORIVW = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.78, 0.97, P = 0.01), but not in women or in both sexes combined. Τhis association remained consistent in some, but not all, sensitivity analyses and was very similar for colon and rectal cancer. There was no evidence of an association for any other sleep trait. Overall, this study provides little to no evidence of an association between genetically predicted sleep traits and CRC risk.

AbstractDiabetes is an established risk factor for colorectal cancer. However, colorectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease and it is not well understood whether diabetes is more strongly associated with some tumor molecular subtypes than others. A better understanding of the association between diabetes and colorectal cancer according to molecular subtypes could provide important insights into the biology of this association. We used data on lifestyle and clinical characteristics from the Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (CCFR) and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO), including 9756 colorectal cancer cases (with tumor marker data) and 9985 controls, to evaluate associations between reported diabetes and risk of colorectal cancer according to molecular subtypes. Tumor markers included BRAF and KRAS mutations, microsatellite instability and CpG island methylator phenotype. In the multinomial logistic regression model, comparing colorectal cancer cases to cancer‐free controls, diabetes was positively associated with colorectal cancer regardless of subtype. The highest OR estimate was found for BRAF‐mutated colorectal cancer, n = 1086 (ORfully adj: 1.67, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.36‐2.05), with an attenuated association observed between diabetes and colorectal cancer without BRAF‐mutations, n = 7959 (ORfully adj: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.19‐1.48). In the case only analysis, BRAF‐mutation was differentially associated with diabetes (Pdifference = .03). For the other markers, associations with diabetes were similar across tumor subtypes. In conclusion, our study confirms the established association between diabetes and colorectal cancer risk, and suggests that it particularly increases the risk of BRAF‐mutated tumors.

Abstract Background: Fusobacterium nucleatum (F. nucleatum) activates oncogenic signaling pathways and induces inflammation to promote colorectal carcinogenesis. Methods: We characterized F. nucleatum and its subspecies in colorectal tumors and examined associations with tumor characteristics and colorectal cancer–specific survival. We conducted deep sequencing of nusA, nusG, and bacterial 16s rRNA genes in tumors from 1,994 patients with colorectal cancer and assessed associations between F. nucleatum presence and clinical characteristics, colorectal cancer–specific mortality, and somatic mutations. Results: F. nucleatum, which was present in 10.3% of tumors, was detected in a higher proportion of right-sided and advanced-stage tumors, particularly subspecies animalis. Presence of F. nucleatum was associated with higher colorectal cancer–specific mortality (HR, 1.97; P = 0.0004). This association was restricted to nonhypermutated, microsatellite-stable tumors (HR, 2.13; P = 0.0002) and those who received chemotherapy [HR, 1.92; confidence interval (CI), 1.07–3.45; P = 0.029). Only F. nucleatum subspecies animalis, the main subspecies detected (65.8%), was associated with colorectal cancer–specific mortality (HR, 2.16; P = 0.0016), subspecies vincentii and nucleatum were not (HR, 1.07; P = 0.86). Additional adjustment for tumor stage suggests that the effect of F. nucleatum on mortality is partly driven by a stage shift. Presence of F. nucleatum was associated with microsatellite instable tumors, tumors with POLE exonuclease domain mutations, and ERBB3 mutations, and suggestively associated with TP53 mutations. Conclusions: F. nucleatum, and particularly subspecies animalis, was associated with a higher colorectal cancer–specific mortality and specific somatic mutated genes. Impact: Our findings identify the F. nucleatum subspecies animalis as negatively impacting colorectal cancer mortality, which may occur through a stage shift and its effect on chemoresistance.

Abstract Protective associations of fruits, vegetables, and fiber intake with colorectal cancer risk have been shown in many, but not all epidemiologic studies. One possible reason for study heterogeneity is that dietary factors may have distinct effects by colorectal cancer molecular subtypes. Here, we investigate the association of fruit, vegetables, and fiber intake with four well-established colorectal cancer molecular subtypes separately and in combination. Nine observational studies including 9,592 cases with molecular subtypes for microsatellite instability (MSI), CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), and somatic mutations in BRAF and KRAS genes, and 7,869 controls were analyzed. Both case-only logistic regression analyses and polytomous logistic regression analyses (with one control set and multiple case groups) were used. Higher fruit intake was associated with a trend toward decreased risk of BRAF-mutated tumors [OR 4th vs. 1st quartile = 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.65–1.04)] but not BRAF-wildtype tumors [1.09 (0.97–1.22); P difference as shown in case-only analysis = 0.02]. This difference was observed in case–control studies and not in cohort studies. Compared with controls, higher fiber intake showed negative association with colorectal cancer risk for cases with microsatellite stable/MSI-low, CIMP-negative, BRAF-wildtype, and KRAS-wildtype tumors (Ptrend range from 0.03 to 3.4e-03), which is consistent with the traditional adenoma-colorectal cancer pathway. These negative associations were stronger compared with MSI-high, CIMP-positive, BRAF-mutated, or KRAS-mutated tumors, but the differences were not statistically significant. These inverse associations for fruit and fiber intake may explain, in part, inconsistent findings between fruit or fiber intake and colorectal cancer risk that have previously been reported. Significance: These analyses by colorectal cancer molecular subtypes potentially explain the inconsistent findings between dietary fruit or fiber intake and overall colorectal cancer risk that have previously been reported.