Weinberg, Clarice R

Background: Breast cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) and traditional risk models (e.g., the Gail model [Gail]) are known to contribute largely independent information, but it is unclear how the overlap varies by ancestry, age, disease type (invasive breast cancer, DCIS), and risk threshold. Methods: In a retrospective case–control study, we evaluated risk prediction performance in 180,398 women (161,849 of European ancestry; 18,549 of Asian ancestry). Odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression models and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were estimated. Results: PRS for invasive disease showed a stronger association in younger (<50 years) women (OR = 2.51, AUC = 0.622) than in women ≥ 50 years (OR = 2.06, AUC = 0.653) of European ancestry. PRS performance in Asians was lower (OR range = 1.62–1.64, AUC = 0.551–0.600). Gail performance was modest across groups and poor in younger Asian women (OR = 0.94–0.99, AUC = 0.523–0.533). Age interactions were observed for both PRS (p < 0.001) and Gail (p < 0.001) in Europeans, whereas in Asians, age interaction was observed only for Gail (invasive: p < 0.001; DCIS: p = 0.002). PRS identified more high-risk individuals than Gail in Asian populations, especially ≥50 years, while Gail identified more in Europeans. Overlap between PRS, Gail, and family history was limited at higher thresholds. Calibration analysis, comparing empirical and model-based ROC curves, showed divergence for both PRS and Gail (p < 0.001), which indicates miscalibration. In Europeans, family history and prior biopsies drove Gail discrimination. In younger Asians, age at first live birth was influential. Conclusions: PRS adds value to risk stratification beyond traditional tools, especially in younger women and Asian ancestry populations.

Abstract Purpose: To determine the relationship between germline pathogenic variants (PV) in cancer predisposition genes and the risk of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Experimental Design: Germline PV frequencies in breast cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D) were compared between DCIS cases and unaffected controls and between DCIS and invasive ductal breast cancer (IDC) cases from a clinical testing cohort (n = 9,887), a population-based cohort (n = 3,876), and the UK Biobank (n = 2,421). The risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) for DCIS cases with PV was estimated in the population-based cohort. Results: Germline PV were observed in 6.5% and 4.6% of women with DCIS in the clinical testing and population-based cohorts, respectively. BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PV frequencies were significantly lower among women with DCIS than those with IDC (clinical cohort: 2.8% vs. 5.7%; population-based cohort: 1.7% vs. 3.7%), whereas the PV frequencies for ATM and CHEK2 were similar. ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2 PV were significantly associated with an increased risk of DCIS (OR &gt; 2.0), but only BRCA2 PV were associated with high risk (OR &gt; 4) in both cohorts. The cumulative incidence of CBC among carriers of PV in high-penetrance genes with DCIS was 23% over 15 years. Conclusions: The enrichment of PV in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2 among women with DCIS suggests that multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with DCIS. Elevated risks of CBC in carriers of PV in high-penetrance genes with DCIS confirmed the utility of testing for surgical decision-making.

AbstractPrevious transcriptome‐wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome‐wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype‐specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta‐analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER−). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER− subtypes, using a case‐only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER– breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS‐significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast‐cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS‐significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER− breast cancer.

AbstractOver the past several years, genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) have succeeded in identifying hundreds of genetic markers associated with common diseases. However, most of these markers confer relatively small increments of risk and explain only a small proportion of familial clustering. To identify obstacles to future progress in genetic epidemiology research and provide recommendations to NIH for overcoming these barriers, the National Cancer Institute sponsored a workshop entitled “Next Generation Analytic Tools for Large‐Scale Genetic Epidemiology Studies of Complex Diseases” on September 15–16, 2010. The goal of the workshop was to facilitate discussions on (1) statistical strategies and methods to efficiently identify genetic and environmental factors contributing to the risk of complex disease; and (2) how to develop, apply, and evaluate these strategies for the design, analysis, and interpretation of large‐scale complex disease association studies in order to guide NIH in setting the future agenda in this area of research. The workshop was organized as a series of short presentations covering scientific (gene‐gene and gene‐environment interaction, complex phenotypes, and rare variants and next generation sequencing) and methodological (simulation modeling and computational resources and data management) topic areas. Specific needs to advance the field were identified during each session and are summarized.Genet. Epidemiol. 36 : 22–35, 2012. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.