Citations

AbstractBackgroundBody mass index (BMI) and diabetes are established risk factors for colorectal cancer (CRC), likely through perturbations in metabolic traits (e.g. insulin resistance and glucose homeostasis). Identification of interactions between variation in genes and these metabolic risk factors may identify novel biologic insights into CRC etiology.MethodsTo improve statistical power and interpretation for gene‐environment interaction (G × E) testing, we tested genetic variants that regulate expression of a gene together for interaction with BMI (kg/m2) and diabetes on CRC risk among 26 017 cases and 20 692 controls. Each variant was weighted based on PrediXcan analysis of gene expression data from colon tissue generated in the Genotype‐Tissue Expression Project for all genes with heritability ≥1%. We used a mixed‐effects model to jointly measure the G × E interaction in a gene by partitioning the interactions into the predicted gene expression levels (fixed effects), and residual G × E effects (random effects). G × BMI analyses were stratified by sex as BMI‐CRC associations differ by sex. We used false discovery rates to account for multiple comparisons and reported all results with FDR <0.2.ResultsAmong 4839 genes tested, genetically predicted expressions of FOXA1 (P = 3.15 × 10−5), PSMC5 (P = 4.51 × 10−4) and CD33 (P = 2.71 × 10−4) modified the association of BMI on CRC risk for men; KIAA0753 (P = 2.29 × 10−5) and SCN1B (P = 2.76 × 10−4) modified the association of BMI on CRC risk for women; and PTPN2 modified the association between diabetes and CRC risk in both sexes (P = 2.31 × 10−5).ConclusionsAggregating G × E interactions and incorporating functional information, we discovered novel genes that may interact with BMI and diabetes on CRC risk.

Abstract Background The risks of breast cancer in African American (AA) women associated with inherited mutations in breast cancer predisposition genes are not well defined. Thus, whether multigene germline hereditary cancer testing panels are applicable to this population is unknown. We assessed associations between mutations in panel-based genes and breast cancer risk in 5054 AA women with breast cancer and 4993 unaffected AA women drawn from 10 epidemiologic studies. Methods Germline DNA samples were sequenced for mutations in 23 cancer predisposition genes using a QIAseq multiplex amplicon panel. Prevalence of mutations and odds ratios (ORs) for associations with breast cancer risk were estimated with adjustment for study design, age, and family history of breast cancer. Results Pathogenic mutations were identified in 10.3% of women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, 5.2% of women with ER-positive breast cancer, and 2.3% of unaffected women. Mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 were associated with high risks of breast cancer (OR = 47.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 10.43 to &gt;100; OR = 7.25, 95% CI = 4.07 to 14.12; OR = 8.54, 95% CI = 3.67 to 24.95, respectively). RAD51D mutations were associated with high risk of ER-negative disease (OR = 7.82, 95% CI = 1.61 to 57.42). Moderate risks were observed for CHEK2, ATM, ERCC3, and FANCC mutations with ER-positive cancer, and RECQL mutations with all breast cancer. Conclusions The study identifies genes that predispose to breast cancer in the AA population, demonstrates the validity of current breast cancer testing panels for use in AA women, and provides a basis for increased referral of AA patients for cancer genetic testing.

Abstract Background: Results from epidemiologic studies examining polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and colorectal cancer risk are inconsistent. Mendelian randomization may strengthen causal inference from observational studies. Given their shared metabolic pathway, examining the combined effects of aspirin/NSAID use with PUFAs could help elucidate an association between PUFAs and colorectal cancer risk. Methods: Information was leveraged from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) regarding PUFA-associated SNPs to create weighted genetic scores (wGS) representing genetically predicted circulating blood PUFAs for 11,016 non-Hispanic white colorectal cancer cases and 13,732 controls in the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO). Associations per SD increase in the wGS were estimated using unconditional logistic regression. Interactions between PUFA wGSs and aspirin/NSAID use on colorectal cancer risk were also examined. Results: Modest colorectal cancer risk reductions were observed per SD increase in circulating linoleic acid [ORLA = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93–0.98; P = 5.2 × 10−4] and α-linolenic acid (ORALA = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.92–0.97; P = 5.4 × 10−5), whereas modest increased risks were observed for arachidonic (ORAA = 1.06; 95% CI = 1.03–1.08; P = 3.3 × 10−5), eicosapentaenoic (OREPA = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.01–1.07; P = 2.5 × 10−3), and docosapentaenoic acids (ORDPA = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.01–1.06; P = 1.2 × 10−2). Each of these effects was stronger among aspirin/NSAID nonusers in the stratified analyses. Conclusions: Our study suggests that higher circulating shorter-chain PUFAs (i.e., LA and ALA) were associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk, whereas longer-chain PUFAs (i.e., AA, EPA, and DPA) were associated with an increased colorectal cancer risk. Impact: The interaction of PUFAs with aspirin/NSAID use indicates a shared colorectal cancer inflammatory pathway. Future research should continue to improve PUFA genetic instruments to elucidate the independent effects of PUFAs on colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE In studies of men of European ancestry, rare pathogenic variants in DNA repair pathway genes have been shown to be associated with risk of aggressive prostate cancer. The contribution of rare coding variation to prostate cancer risk in men of African ancestry has not been established. METHODS We sequenced a panel of 19 DNA repair and cancer predisposition genes in 2,453 African American and 1,151 Ugandan cases and controls with prostate cancer. Rare variants were classified as pathogenic or putatively functionally disruptive and examined in association with prostate cancer risk and disease aggressiveness in gene and pathway-level association analyses. RESULTS Pathogenic variants were found in 75 of 2,098 cases (3.6%) and 31 of 1,481 controls (2.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.19 to 2.79; P = .0044), with the association being stronger for more aggressive disease phenotypes (OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.54 to 6.23; P = .0022). The highest risks for aggressive disease were observed with pathogenic variants in the ATM, BRCA2, PALB2, and NBN genes, with ORs ranging from approximately 4 to 15 in the combined study sample of African American and Ugandan men. Rare, nonpathogenic, nonsynonymous variants did not have a major impact on risk of overall prostate cancer or disease aggressiveness. CONCLUSION Rare pathogenic variants in DNA repair genes have appreciable effects on risk of aggressive prostate cancer in men of African ancestry. These findings have potential implications for panel testing and risk stratification in this high-risk population.

Abstract Persons of African ancestry (AA) have a twofold higher risk for multiple myeloma (MM) compared with persons of European ancestry (EA). Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) support a genetic contribution to MM etiology in individuals of EA. Little is known about genetic risk factors for MM in individuals of AA. We performed a meta-analysis of 2 GWASs of MM in 1813 cases and 8871 controls and conducted an admixture mapping scan to identify risk alleles. We fine-mapped the 23 known susceptibility loci to find markers that could better capture MM risk in individuals of AA and constructed a polygenic risk score (PRS) to assess the aggregated effect of known MM risk alleles. In GWAS meta-analysis, we identified 2 suggestive novel loci located at 9p24.3 and 9p13.1 at P &lt; 1 × 10−6; however, no genome-wide significant association was noted. In admixture mapping, we observed a genome-wide significant inverse association between local AA at 2p24.1-23.1 and MM risk in AA individuals. Of the 23 known EA risk variants, 20 showed directional consistency, and 9 replicated at P &lt; .05 in AA individuals. In 8 regions, we identified markers that better capture MM risk in persons with AA. AA individuals with a PRS in the top 10% had a 1.82-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.56-2.11) increased MM risk compared with those with average risk (25%-75%). The strongest functional association was between the risk allele for variant rs56219066 at 5q15 and lower ELL2 expression (P = 5.1 × 10−12). Our study shows that common genetic variation contributes to MM risk in individuals with AA.

Abstract Purpose: Reducing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality through early detection would improve efficacy if targeted. We developed a colorectal cancer risk prediction model incorporating personal, family, genetic, and environmental risk factors to enhance prevention. Methods: A familial risk profile (FRP) was calculated to summarize individuals' risk based on detailed cancer family history (FH), family structure, probabilities of mutation in major colorectal cancer susceptibility genes, and a polygenic component. We developed risk models, including individuals' FRP or binary colorectal cancer FH, and colorectal cancer risk factors collected at enrollment using population-based colorectal cancer cases (N = 4,445) and controls (N = 3,967) recruited by the Colon Cancer Family Registry Cohort (CCFRC). Model validation used CCFRC follow-up data for population-based (N = 12,052) and clinic-based (N = 5,584) relatives with no cancer history at recruitment to assess model calibration [expected/observed rate ratio (E/O)] and discrimination [area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC)]. Results: The E/O [95% confidence interval (CI)] for FRP models for population-based relatives were 1.04 (0.74–1.45) for men and 0.86 (0.64–1.20) for women, and for clinic-based relatives were 1.15 (0.87–1.58) for men and 1.04 (0.76–1.45) for women. The age-adjusted AUCs (95% CI) for FRP models for population-based relatives were 0.69 (0.60–0.78) for men and 0.70 (0.62–0.77) for women, and for clinic-based relatives were 0.77 (0.69–0.84) for men and 0.68 (0.60–0.76) for women. The incremental values of AUC for FRP over FH models for population-based relatives were 0.08 (0.01–0.15) for men and 0.10 (0.04–0.16) for women, and for clinic-based relatives were 0.11 (0.05–0.17) for men and 0.11 (0.06–0.17) for women. Conclusions: Both models calibrated well. The FRP-based model provided better risk stratification and risk discrimination than the FH-based model. Impact: Our findings suggest detailed FH may be useful for targeted risk-based screening and clinical management.

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 &lt; .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.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplasm thought to arise from a damaged germinal center B-cell that progresses to a plasma cell clone arising in bone marrow. MM comprises 20% of all hematologic cancer deaths. Persons of African ancestry (AA) have a 1.5 to 2-fold higher risk compared to individuals of European ancestry (EA). Genetically driven differences in hematopoiesis may lead to variation in the levels white blood cell (WBC) subsets which could, in turn, be associated with MM etiology. There are differences in genetic determinants of WBC traits between EA and AA populations, with possible implications for the racial disparity in risk. We tested the above hypothesis using Mendelian randomization (MR), an approach that leverages genetic determinants of specific traits (i.e. WBC counts) to estimate their effects on the risk of an outcome; and a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), which utilizes genetic predictors of gene expression to identify susceptibility genes. These analytic approaches were applied to data from the African American Multiple Myeloma Study (AAMMS) consisting of 1813 cases and 8871 AA cancer-free controls to examine how differences in heritable WBC gene expression profiles influence MM risk. Genetic determinants of variation in WBC subsets in AA were obtained from the literature and supplemented with new genome-wide association findings in AA subjects from the UK Biobank cohort (n=6108). Odds ratios (OR) for MM per 1 standard deviation (SD) increase in each WBC phenotype were estimated using independent (linkage disequilibrium (LD) r2<0.10) variants with P<10-6 as genetic instruments. Analyses based on variants associated with WBC traits in AA populations did not identify any statistically-significant associations between MM risk and WBC overall (p=0.81, using 15 SNPs) or subsets (lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, neutrophils and basophils, p>0.05 for each). However, when we applied genetic determinants of WBC identified in 330,000 cancer-free EA UK Biobank participants (P<10-8, replication P<0.05, LD r2<0.05), a statistically significant inverse relationship emerged between increasing lymphocyte counts and MM risk (OR=0.80, 95% CI: 0.66-0.97, p=0.02, using 385 SNPs), as well as increasing basophil counts (OR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.41-0.96, p=0.03, using 140 SNPs). Next, we examined the association between WBC gene expression profiles and MM risk in AAMMS data. We applied published and validated ancestry-specific models developed using the PrediXcan approach, which leverage germline genetic and transcriptomic data from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) (Mogil et al. PMID: 30096133). The primary TWAS used gene expression models trained in AA subjects (n=233), with sensitivity analyses using models developed in AA and Hispanic subjects (n=585). The TWAS significance threshold was based on the number of genes with significant germline prediction models (p<0.05 and R2 ≥0.05) in AA, corresponding to P < 0.05/2700 = 1.85×10-5. The expression of two genes was significantly associated with MM risk: KANK1at 9p24.3 (P = 1.01×10-5) and DNAJC27at 2p23.3 (P = 1.56×10-5). KANK1is a candidate tumor suppressor gene for renal cell carcinoma and has recently been associated with MM risk in AA [Du, Blood 2017 130:3058]. Here we provide additional evidence for its role in MM etiology via gene expression-mediated mechanisms. DNAJC27 (previously known as RBJ) is a novel MM risk gene linked to constitutive activation of ERK in solid tumors. We also identified two suggestively associated genes: PRR14 (P = 1.34×10-4; combined AA-Hispanic sample: P = 1.56×10-6), which has been linked to MM risk in EA populations, and PARP16 (P = 9.46×10-5). To our knowledge this is the first study to comprehensively examine variation in WBC traits and gene expression profiles with respect to MM risk in AA. Our TWAS analysis leveraged data from the largest collection of genetic and gene expression data in AA, enabling ancestry-matched inference and identification of two novel risk genes. Although the limited availability of genetic instruments for WBC limited the power of MR analysis, findings using variants identified in European populations may offer some insight into trans-ethnic etiologic pathways and contribute to risk stratification strategies using genetic and blood cell count biomarkers. Future studies, particularly with MGUS-free controls, are needed to validate these results. Disclosures Song: Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment. Rand:Ancestry.com: Employment. Ailawadhi:Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy. Nooka:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; GSK: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Spectrum pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Adaptive technologies: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; BMS: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation. Singhal:Bureau of Millennium/Takeda, Celgene, Janssen, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Bluebird: Speakers Bureau. van Rhee:Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Castleman Disease Collaborative Network: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; Adicet Bio: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy. Mehta:Millennium/Takeda, Celgene; stock in Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Bluebird: Speakers Bureau. Wolf:Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Martin:Roche and Juno: Consultancy; Amgen, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Fiala:Incyte: Research Funding. Terebelo:Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Anderson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Scientific Founder; Oncopep: Other: Scientific Founder; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Other: Advisory Board. Vij:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Bernal-Mizrachi:TAKEDA: Research Funding; Kodikas Therapeutic Solutions, Inc: Equity Ownership; Winship Cancer Institute: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Morgan:Amgen, Roche, Abbvie, Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Other: research grant, Research Funding. Zonder:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Huff:Member of Safety Monitoring Board for Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm, Sanofi, MiDiagnostics: Consultancy. Lonial:Karyopharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy. Orlowski:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding.

Interindividual differences in DNA repair systems may play a role in modulating the individual risk of developing colorectal cancer. To better ascertain the role of DNA repair gene polymorphisms on colon and rectal cancer risk individually, we evaluated 15,419 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within 185 DNA repair genes using GWAS data from the Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR) and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO), which included 8,178 colon cancer, 2,936 rectum cancer cases and 14,659 controls. Rs1800734 (in MLH1 gene) was associated with colon cancer risk (p‐value = 3.5 × 10−6) and rs2189517 (in RAD51B) with rectal cancer risk (p‐value = 5.7 × 10−6). The results had statistical significance close to the Bonferroni corrected p‐value of 5.8 × 10−6. Ninety‐four SNPs were significantly associated with colorectal cancer risk after Binomial Sequential Goodness of Fit (BSGoF) procedure and confirmed the relevance of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) and homologous recombination pathways for colon and rectum cancer, respectively. Defects in MMR genes are known to be crucial for familial form of colorectal cancer but our findings suggest that specific genetic variations in MLH1 are important also in the individual predisposition to sporadic colon cancer. Other SNPs associated with the risk of colon cancer (e.g., rs16906252 in MGMT) were found to affect mRNA expression levels in colon transverse and therefore working as possible cis‐eQTL suggesting possible mechanisms of carcinogenesis.

1562 Background: In Caucasian-predominant populations, overweight or obese NSCLC pts (BMI≥25-kg/m2) have better prognosis while underweight (BMI≤18.5-kg/m2) pts have a worse prognosis. A large pooled sample allowed us to evaluate the role of ethnicity in this BMI-NSCLC OS relationship. Methods: Using individual data, survival analysis was performed on 15 ILCCO studies, assessing the interactions between ethnicity and BMI on overall survival (OS). Adjusted Hazard Ratios (aHR) from Cox models and adjusted penalized smoothing spline plots were generated. Results: Among 13416 (77%) Caucasian, 2975 (17%) Asian, and 935 (5%) Black NSCLC pts analyzed, we confirmed that for all pts, being underweight at NSCLC diagnosis was associated with worse OS (aHR=1.68, CI 1.5-1.8, p<0.001), while overweight/obese pts had improved survival (aHR 0.89, CI 0.8-0.9, p<0.001), when compared to pts with normal BMI. In general, Black pts had poorer OS than Caucasian pts (aHR 1.26 CI 1.1-1.4, p<0.001). However, the BMI-OS relationship differed according to ethnicity (BMI-ethnicity interaction, p=0.009): Caucasian underweight pts had poorer OS (aHR 1.67, CI 1.5-1.8, P<0.001) while overweight/obese pts had improved OS (aHR 0.89, CI 0.8-0.9, P<0.001). In Asian pts, these two associations were aHR 1.15, CI 0.8-1.5, P=0.33, and aHR 0.91, CI 0.7-1.1, P=0.32, respectively. In Black pts, these two associations were aHR 1.06, CI 0.7-1.5, p=0.73 and 0.75, CI 0.6-0.8 p<0.001, respectively. For overweight/obese patients, as BMI rises from 25-kg/m2 through 45-kg/m2, the prognosis worsens for Caucasian pts, remains stable for Asian pts, but improves for Black pts. Conclusions: InCaucasian pts, being underweight had a greater negative impact on OS than for Asian or Black pts, while being obese had a greater beneficial impact in Blacks than in other ethnic groups. These ethnic differences likely reflect genetically-informed muscle/adipose tissue distributions, where Black pts may have less sarcopenic obesity than other ethnicities. In future prognostic studies, BMI relationships must account for ethnic differences.