Tjønneland, Anne

AbstractThe adiposity influence on colorectal cancer prognosis remains poorly characterised. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis on post‐diagnosis adiposity measures (body mass index [BMI], waist circumference, waist‐to‐hip ratio, weight) or their changes and colorectal cancer outcomes. PubMed and Embase were searched through 28 February 2022. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were conducted when at least three studies had sufficient information. The quality of evidence was interpreted and graded by the Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel. We reviewed 124 observational studies (85 publications). Meta‐analyses were possible for BMI and all‐cause mortality, colorectal cancer‐specific mortality, and cancer recurrence/disease‐free survival. Non‐linear meta‐analysis indicated a reverse J‐shaped association between BMI and colorectal cancer outcomes (nadir at BMI 28 kg/m2). The highest risk, relative to the nadir, was observed at both ends of the BMI distribution (18 and 38 kg/m2), namely 60% and 23% higher risk for all‐cause mortality; 95% and 26% for colorectal cancer‐specific mortality; and 37% and 24% for cancer recurrence/disease‐free survival, respectively. The higher risk with low BMI was attenuated in secondary analyses of RCTs (compared to cohort studies), among studies with longer follow‐up, and in women suggesting potential methodological limitations and/or altered physiological state. Descriptively synthesised studies on other adiposity‐outcome associations of interest were limited in number and methodological quality. All the associations were graded as limited (likelihood of causality: no conclusion) due to potential methodological limitations (reverse causation, confounding, selection bias). Additional well‐designed observational studies and interventional trials are needed to provide further clarification.

AbstractLow physical activity and high sedentary behaviour have been clearly linked with colorectal cancer development, yet data on their potential role in colorectal cancer survival is limited. Better characterisation of these relationships is needed for the development of post‐diagnosis physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidance for colorectal cancer survivors. We searched PubMed and Embase through 28 February 2022 for studies assessing post‐diagnosis physical activity, and/or sedentary behaviour in relation to all‐cause and cause‐specific mortality and recurrence after colorectal cancer diagnosis. Total and recreational physical activity were assessed overall and by frequency, duration, intensity, and volume using categorical, linear, and non‐linear dose–response random‐effects meta‐analyses. The Global Cancer Update Programme (CUP Global) independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel interpreted and graded the likelihood of causality. We identified 16 observational studies on 82,220 non‐overlapping patients from six countries. Physical activity was consistently inversely associated with colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality outcomes, with 13%–60% estimated reductions in risk. Sedentary behaviour was positively associated with all‐cause mortality. The evidence had methodological limitations including potential confounding, selection bias and reverse causation, coupled with a limited number of studies for most associations. The CUP Global Expert panel concluded limited‐suggestive evidence for recreational physical activity with all‐cause mortality and cancer recurrence. Total physical activity and its specific domains and dimensions, and sedentary behaviour were all graded as limited‐no conclusion for all outcomes. Future research should focus on randomised trials, while observational studies should obtain objective and repeated physical activity measures and better adjustment for confounders.

AbstractBased on the World Cancer Research Fund Global Cancer Update Programme, we performed systematic reviews and meta‐analyses to investigate the association of post‐diagnosis adiposity, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and dietary factors with colorectal cancer prognosis. We searched PubMed and Embase until 28th February, 2022. An independent expert committee and expert panel graded the quality of evidence. A total of 167 unique publications were reviewed, and all but five were observational studies. The quality of the evidence was graded conservatively due to the high risk of several biases. There was evidence of non‐linearity in the associations between body mass index and colorectal cancer prognosis. The associations appeared reverse J‐shaped, and the quality of this evidence was graded as limited (likelihood of causality: limited‐no conclusion). The evidence on recreational physical activity and lower risk of all‐cause mortality (relative risk [RR] highest vs. lowest: 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62–0.77) and recurrence/disease‐free survival (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70–0.92) was graded as limited‐suggestive. There was limited‐suggestive evidence for the associations between healthy dietary and/or lifestyle patterns (including diets that comprised plant‐based foods), intake of whole grains and coffee with lower risk of all‐cause mortality, and between unhealthy dietary patterns and intake of sugary drinks with higher risk of all‐cause mortality. The evidence for other exposures on colorectal cancer outcomes was sparse and graded as limited‐no conclusion. Analyses were conducted excluding cancer patients with metastases without substantial changes in the findings. Well‐designed intervention and cohort studies are needed to support the development of lifestyle recommendations for colorectal cancer patients.

Abstract The role of diet in colorectal cancer prognosis is not well understood and specific lifestyle recommendations are lacking. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal observational studies on post‐diagnosis dietary factors, supplement use and colorectal cancer survival outcomes in PubMed and Embase from inception until 28th February 2022. Random‐effects dose–response meta‐analyses were conducted when at least three studies had sufficient information. The evidence was interpreted and graded by the CUP Global independent Expert Committee on Cancer Survivorship and Expert Panel. Five RCTs and 35 observational studies were included (30,242 cases, over 8700 all‐cause and 2100 colorectal cancer deaths, 3700 progression, recurrence, or disease‐free events). Meta‐analyses, including 3–10 observational studies each, were conducted for: whole grains, nuts/peanuts, red and processed meat, dairy products, sugary drinks, artificially sweetened beverages, coffee, alcohol, dietary glycaemic load/index, insulin load/index, marine omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, supplemental calcium, circulating 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and all‐cause mortality; for alcohol, supplemental calcium, circulating 25(OH)D and colorectal cancer‐specific mortality; and for circulating 25(OH)D and recurrence/disease‐free survival. The overall evidence was graded as ‘limited’. The inverse associations between healthy dietary and/or lifestyle patterns (including diets that comprised plant‐based foods), whole grains, total, caffeinated, or decaffeinated coffee and all‐cause mortality and the positive associations between unhealthy dietary patterns, sugary drinks and all‐cause mortality provided ‘limited—suggestive’ evidence. All other exposure‐outcome associations provided ‘limited—no conclusion’ evidence. Additional, well‐conducted cohort studies and carefully designed RCTs are needed to develop specific lifestyle recommendations for colorectal cancer survivors.

Abstract Background: There are conflicting data on whether nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with susceptibility to pancreatic cancer. Using Mendelian randomization (MR), we investigated the relationship between genetic predisposition to NAFLD and risk for pancreatic cancer. Methods: Data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) within the Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium (PanScan; cases n = 5,090, controls n = 8,733) and the Pancreatic Cancer Case Control Consortium (PanC4; cases n = 4,163, controls n = 3,792) were analyzed. We used data on 68 genetic variants with four different MR methods [inverse variance weighting (IVW), MR-Egger, simple median, and penalized weighted median] separately to predict genetic heritability of NAFLD. We then assessed the relationship between each of the four MR methods and pancreatic cancer risk, using logistic regression to calculate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusting for PC risk factors, including obesity and diabetes. Results: No association was found between genetically predicted NAFLD and pancreatic cancer risk in the PanScan or PanC4 samples [e.g., PanScan, IVW OR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88–1.22; MR-Egger OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.65–1.21; PanC4, IVW OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90–1.27; MR-Egger OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67–1.28]. None of the four MR methods indicated an association between genetically predicted NAFLD and pancreatic cancer risk in either sample. Conclusions: Genetic predisposition to NAFLD is not associated with pancreatic cancer risk. Impact: Given the close relationship between NAFLD and metabolic conditions, it is plausible that any association between NAFLD and pancreatic cancer might reflect host metabolic perturbations (e.g., obesity, diabetes, or metabolic syndrome) and does not necessarily reflect a causal relationship between NAFLD and pancreatic cancer.

Abstract Germline variation and smoking are independently associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We conducted genome-wide smoking interaction analysis of PDAC using genotype data from four previous genome-wide association studies in individuals of European ancestry (7,937 cases and 11,774 controls). Examination of expression quantitative trait loci data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project followed by colocalization analysis was conducted to determine whether there was support for common SNP(s) underlying the observed associations. Statistical tests were two sided and P < 5 × 10–8 was considered statistically significant. Genome-wide significant evidence of qualitative interaction was identified on chr2q21.3 in intron 5 of the transmembrane protein 163 (TMEM163) and upstream of the cyclin T2 (CCNT2). The most significant SNP using the Empirical Bayes method, in this region that included 45 significantly associated SNPs, was rs1818613 [per allele OR in never smokers 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82–0.93; former smokers 1.00, 95% CI, 0.91–1.07; current smokers 1.25, 95% CI 1.12–1.40, Pinteraction = 3.08 × 10–9). Examination of the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project data demonstrated an expression quantitative trait locus in this region for TMEM163 and CCNT2 in several tissue types. Colocalization analysis supported a shared SNP, rs842357, in high linkage disequilibrium with rs1818613 (r2 = 0. 94) driving both the observed interaction and the expression quantitative trait loci signals. Future studies are needed to confirm and understand the differential biologic mechanisms by smoking status that contribute to our PDAC findings. Significance: This large genome-wide interaction study identifies a susceptibility locus on 2q21.3 that significantly modified PDAC risk by smoking status, providing insight into smoking-associated PDAC, with implications for prevention.

Abstract Background: Obesity and diabetes are major modifiable risk factors for pancreatic cancer. Interactions between genetic variants and diabetes/obesity have not previously been comprehensively investigated in pancreatic cancer at the genome-wide level. Methods: We conducted a gene–environment interaction (GxE) analysis including 8,255 cases and 11,900 controls from four pancreatic cancer genome-wide association study (GWAS) datasets (Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium I–III and Pancreatic Cancer Case Control Consortium). Obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) and diabetes (duration ≥3 years) were the environmental variables of interest. Approximately 870,000 SNPs (minor allele frequency ≥0.005, genotyped in at least one dataset) were analyzed. Case–control (CC), case-only (CO), and joint-effect test methods were used for SNP-level GxE analysis. As a complementary approach, gene-based GxE analysis was also performed. Age, sex, study site, and principal components accounting for population substructure were included as covariates. Meta-analysis was applied to combine individual GWAS summary statistics. Results: No genome-wide significant interactions (departures from a log-additive odds model) with diabetes or obesity were detected at the SNP level by the CC or CO approaches. The joint-effect test detected numerous genome-wide significant GxE signals in the GWAS main effects top hit regions, but the significance diminished after adjusting for the GWAS top hits. In the gene-based analysis, a significant interaction of diabetes with variants in the FAM63A (family with sequence similarity 63 member A) gene (significance threshold P < 1.25 × 10−6) was observed in the meta-analysis (PGxE = 1.2 ×10−6, PJoint = 4.2 ×10−7). Conclusions: This analysis did not find significant GxE interactions at the SNP level but found one significant interaction with diabetes at the gene level. A larger sample size might unveil additional genetic factors via GxE scans. Impact: This study may contribute to discovering the mechanism of diabetes-associated pancreatic cancer.

Abstract Background Although 20 pancreatic cancer susceptibility loci have been identified through genome-wide association studies in individuals of European ancestry, much of its heritability remains unexplained and the genes responsible largely unknown. Methods To discover novel pancreatic cancer risk loci and possible causal genes, we performed a pancreatic cancer transcriptome-wide association study in Europeans using three approaches: FUSION, MetaXcan, and Summary-MulTiXcan. We integrated genome-wide association studies summary statistics from 9040 pancreatic cancer cases and 12 496 controls, with gene expression prediction models built using transcriptome data from histologically normal pancreatic tissue samples (NCI Laboratory of Translational Genomics [n = 95] and Genotype-Tissue Expression v7 [n = 174] datasets) and data from 48 different tissues (Genotype-Tissue Expression v7, n = 74–421 samples). Results We identified 25 genes whose genetically predicted expression was statistically significantly associated with pancreatic cancer risk (false discovery rate < .05), including 14 candidate genes at 11 novel loci (1p36.12: CELA3B; 9q31.1: SMC2, SMC2-AS1; 10q23.31: RP11-80H5.9; 12q13.13: SMUG1; 14q32.33: BTBD6; 15q23: HEXA; 15q26.1: RCCD1; 17q12: PNMT, CDK12, PGAP3; 17q22: SUPT4H1; 18q11.22: RP11-888D10.3; and 19p13.11: PGPEP1) and 11 at six known risk loci (5p15.33: TERT, CLPTM1L, ZDHHC11B; 7p14.1: INHBA; 9q34.2: ABO; 13q12.2: PDX1; 13q22.1: KLF5; and 16q23.1: WDR59, CFDP1, BCAR1, TMEM170A). The association for 12 of these genes (CELA3B, SMC2, and PNMT at novel risk loci and TERT, CLPTM1L, INHBA, ABO, PDX1, KLF5, WDR59, CFDP1, and BCAR1 at known loci) remained statistically significant after Bonferroni correction. Conclusions By integrating gene expression and genotype data, we identified novel pancreatic cancer risk loci and candidate functional genes that warrant further investigation.

Objective Determinants of the increased risk of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in SLE are unclear. Using data from a recent lymphoma genome-wide association study (GWAS), we assessed whether certain lupus-related single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were also associated with DLBCL. Methods GWAS data on European Caucasians from the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph) provided a total of 3857 DLBCL cases and 7666 general-population controls. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. Results Among the 28 SLE-related SNPs investigated, the two most convincingly associated with risk of DLBCL included the CD40 SLE risk allele rs4810485 on chromosome 20q13 (OR per risk allele=1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.16, p=0.0134), and the HLA SLE risk allele rs1270942 on chromosome 6p21.33 (OR per risk allele=1.17, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.36, p=0.0362). Of additional possible interest were rs2205960 and rs12537284. The rs2205960 SNP, related to a cytokine of the tumour necrosis factor superfamily TNFSF4, was associated with an OR per risk allele of 1.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.16, p=0.0549. The OR for the rs12537284 (chromosome 7q32, IRF5 gene) risk allele was 1.08, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.18, p=0.0765. Conclusions These data suggest several plausible genetic links between DLBCL and SLE.