Citations

Background and Aims: Fatty liver disease is a major public health threat due to its very high prevalence and related morbidity and mortality. Focused and dedicated interventions are urgently needed to target disease prevention, treatment, and care. Approach and Results: We developed an aligned, prioritized action agenda for the global fatty liver disease community of practice. Following a Delphi methodology over 2 rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the action priorities using Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a 4-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. Priorities were revised between rounds, and in R2, panelists also ranked the priorities within 6 domains: epidemiology, treatment and care, models of care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy. The consensus fatty liver disease action agenda encompasses 29 priorities. In R2, the mean percentage of “agree” responses was 82.4%, with all individual priorities having at least a super-majority of agreement (> 66.7% “agree”). The highest-ranked action priorities included collaboration between liver specialists and primary care doctors on early diagnosis, action to address the needs of people living with multiple morbidities, and the incorporation of fatty liver disease into relevant non-communicable disease strategies and guidance. Conclusions: This consensus-driven multidisciplinary fatty liver disease action agenda developed by care providers, clinical researchers, and public health and policy experts provides a path to reduce the prevalence of fatty liver disease and improve health outcomes. To implement this agenda, concerted efforts will be needed at the global, regional, and national levels.

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 Background The shared inherited genetic contribution to risk of different cancers is not fully known. In this study, we leverage results from 12 cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to quantify pairwise genome-wide genetic correlations across cancers and identify novel cancer susceptibility loci. Methods We collected GWAS summary statistics for 12 solid cancers based on 376 759 participants with cancer and 532 864 participants without cancer of European ancestry. The included cancer types were breast, colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, glioma, head and neck, lung, melanoma, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, and renal cancers. We conducted cross-cancer GWAS and transcriptome-wide association studies to discover novel cancer susceptibility loci. Finally, we assessed the extent of variant-specific pleiotropy among cancers at known and newly identified cancer susceptibility loci. Results We observed widespread but modest genome-wide genetic correlations across cancers. In cross-cancer GWAS and transcriptome-wide association studies, we identified 15 novel cancer susceptibility loci. Additionally, we identified multiple variants at 77 distinct loci with strong evidence of being associated with at least 2 cancer types by testing for pleiotropy at known cancer susceptibility loci. Conclusions Overall, these results suggest that some genetic risk variants are shared among cancers, though much of cancer heritability is cancer-specific and thus tissue-specific. The increase in statistical power associated with larger sample sizes in cross-disease analysis allows for the identification of novel susceptibility regions. Future studies incorporating data on multiple cancer types are likely to identify additional regions associated with the risk of multiple cancer types.

Abstract Background Mendelian randomization (MR) studies are susceptible to metadata errors (e.g. incorrect specification of the effect allele column) and other analytical issues that can introduce substantial bias into analyses. We developed a quality control (QC) pipeline for the Fatty Acids in Cancer Mendelian Randomization Collaboration (FAMRC) that can be used to identify and correct for such errors. Methods We collated summary association statistics from fatty acid and cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and subjected the collated data to a comprehensive QC pipeline. We identified metadata errors through comparison of study-specific statistics to external reference data sets (the National Human Genome Research Institute-European Bioinformatics Institute GWAS catalogue and 1000 genome super populations) and other analytical issues through comparison of reported to expected genetic effect sizes. Comparisons were based on three sets of genetic variants: (i) GWAS hits for fatty acids, (ii) GWAS hits for cancer and (iii) a 1000 genomes reference set. Results We collated summary data from 6 fatty acid and 54 cancer GWAS. Metadata errors and analytical issues with the potential to introduce substantial bias were identified in seven studies (11.6%). After resolving metadata errors and analytical issues, we created a data set of 219 842 genetic associations with 90 cancer types, generated in analyses of 566 665 cancer cases and 1 622 374 controls. Conclusions In this large MR collaboration, 11.6% of included studies were affected by a substantial metadata error or analytical issue. By increasing the integrity of collated summary data prior to their analysis, our protocol can be used to increase the reliability of downstream MR analyses. Our pipeline is available to other researchers via the CheckSumStats package (https://github.com/MRCIEU/CheckSumStats).

Abstract Differences by sex in lung cancer incidence and mortality have been reported which cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior, implying existence of genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development. However, the information about sex dimorphism in lung cancer risk is quite limited despite the great success in lung cancer association studies. By adopting a stringent two-stage analysis strategy, we performed a genome-wide gene–sex interaction analysis using genotypes from a lung cancer cohort including ~ 47 000 individuals with European ancestry. Three low-frequency variants (minor allele frequency < 0.05), rs17662871 [odds ratio (OR) = 0.71, P = 4.29×10−8); rs79942605 (OR = 2.17, P = 2.81×10−8) and rs208908 (OR = 0.70, P = 4.54×10−8) were identified with different risk effect of lung cancer between men and women. Further expression quantitative trait loci and functional annotation analysis suggested rs208908 affects lung cancer risk through differential regulation of Coxsackie virus and adenovirus receptor gene expression in lung tissues between men and women. Our study is one of the first studies to provide novel insights about the genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development.

Abstract Background: Somatic EGFR mutations define a subset of non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that have clinical impact on NSCLC risk and outcome. However, EGFR-mutation-status is often missing in epidemiologic datasets. We developed and tested pragmatic approaches to account for EGFR-mutation-status based on variables commonly included in epidemiologic datasets and evaluated the clinical utility of these approaches. Methods: Through analysis of the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) epidemiologic datasets, we developed a regression model for EGFR-status; we then applied a clinical-restriction approach using the optimal cut-point, and a second epidemiologic, multiple imputation approach to ILCCO survival analyses that did and did not account for EGFR-status. Results: Of 35,356 ILCCO patients with NSCLC, EGFR-mutation-status was available in 4,231 patients. A model regressing known EGFR-mutation-status on clinical and demographic variables achieved a concordance index of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.74–0.77) in the training and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.74–0.79) in the testing dataset. At an optimal cut-point of probability-score = 0.335, sensitivity = 69% and specificity = 72.5% for determining EGFR-wildtype status. In both restriction-based and imputation-based regression analyses of the individual roles of BMI on overall survival of patients with NSCLC, similar results were observed between overall and EGFR-mutation-negative cohort analyses of patients of all ancestries. However, our approach identified some differences: EGFR-mutated Asian patients did not incur a survival benefit from being obese, as observed in EGFR-wildtype Asian patients. Conclusions: We introduce a pragmatic method to evaluate the potential impact of EGFR-status on epidemiological analyses of NSCLC. Impact: The proposed method is generalizable in the common occurrence in which EGFR-status data are missing.

AbstractBackgroundRecent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.Methods483 BRCA1 and 1318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were 3 versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen receptor (ER)–negative (PRSER-), or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk.ResultsPRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07 to 1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28 to 2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer odds ratios were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions.ConclusionsPopulation-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and informing clinical management.

Abstract There is growing evidence showing that sex disparity in lung cancer risk cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior, implying existence of genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development. However, the information about sex dimorphism in lung cancer risk is quite limited despite the great success in lung cancer association studies. By adopting a stringent two-stage analysis strategy, we performed a genome-wide gene-sex interaction analysis using genotype from a lung cancer cohort including ~ 47,000 individuals with European ancestry. Three low-frequency variants (minor allele frequency < 0.05), rs17662871 (OR=0.71, p=4.29x10-8); rs79942605 (OR=2.17, p=2.81x10-8); and rs208908 (OR=0.70, p=4.54x10-8), were identified with different risk effect of lung cancer between men and women. Further eQTL and functional annotation analysis suggested rs208908 affect lung cancer risk through differential regulation of CXADR (Coxsackie Virus And Adenovirus Receptor) gene expression in lung tissues between men and women. Our study is one of the first studies to provide novel insights about the genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development.

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 &lt; 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.