Article

CYP1A1/2 haplotypes and lung cancer and assessment of confounding by population stratification.

Department of Medicine and Division of Neuroepidemiology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Cancer Research (Impact Factor: 9.28). 04/2009; 69(6):2340-8. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2576
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Prior studies of lung cancer and CYP1A1/2 in African-American and Latino populations have shown inconsistent results and have not yet investigated the haplotype block structure of CYP1A1/2 or addressed potential population stratification. To investigate haplotypes in the CYP1A1/2 region and lung cancer in African-Americans and Latinos, we conducted a case-control study (1998-2003). African-Americans (n = 535) and Latinos (n = 412) were frequency matched on age, sex, and self-reported race/ethnicity. We used a custom genotyping panel containing 50 single nucleotide polymorphisms in the CYP1A1/2 region and 184 ancestry informative markers selected to have large allele frequency differences between Africans, Europeans, and Amerindians. Latinos exhibited significant haplotype main effects in two blocks even after adjusting for admixture [odds ratio (OR), 2.02; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.28-3.19 and OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83], but no main effects were found among African-Americans. Adjustment for admixture revealed substantial confounding by population stratification among Latinos but not African-Americans. Among Latinos and African-Americans, interactions between smoking level and haplotypes were not statistically significant. Evidence of population stratification among Latinos underscores the importance of adjusting for admixture in lung cancer association studies, particularly in Latino populations. These results suggest that a variant occurring within the CYP1A2 region may be conferring an increased risk of lung cancer in Latinos.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
126 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Ancestry estimation serves as a tool to identify genetic contributions to disease but may contribute to racial discrimination and stigmatization. We sought to understand user perspectives on the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation to inform research practice and contribute to debates about the use of race and ancestry in genetics. Methods: Key informant interviews with 22 scientists were conducted to examine scientists’ understandings of the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation. Results: Three main perspectives were observed among key informant scientists who use ancestry estimation in genetic epidemiology research. Population geneticists self-identified as educators who controlled the meaning and application of ancestry estimation in research. Clinician-researchers were optimistic about the application of ancestry estimation to individualized risk assessment and personalized medicine. Epidemiologists remained ambivalent toward ancestry estimation and suggested a continued role for race in their research. Conclusions: We observed an imbalance of control over the meaning and application of ancestry estimation among disciplines that may result in unwarranted or premature translation of ancestry estimation into medicine and public health. Differences in disciplinary perspectives need to be addressed if translational benefits of genetic ancestry estimation are to be realized. Keywords: bioethics, continental population groups, genetics, interdisciplinary communication, translational research
    AJOB Primary Research. 10/2012; 3(4):87-97.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous studies proposed that CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism might be associated with risk of lung cancer by influencing the function of CYP1A2. However, previous studies on the association between CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and risk of lung cancer reported inconsistent findings. We performed a meta-analysis of the published case-control studies to assess the association between CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and risk of lung cancer. PubMed and Embase were searched to identify relevant studies on the association between CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and risk of lung cancer, and seven studies with a total of 3,320 subjects were finally included into the meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (95%CI) was calculated to evaluate the association. Meta-analysis of total studies showed that CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism contributed to risk of lung cancer under all four genetic models (C versus A: OR = 1.26, 95%CI 1.13 to 1.40, P < 0.001; CC versus AA: OR = 1.61, 95%CI 1.28 to 2.04, P < 0.001; CC versus AA/AC: OR = 1.52, 95%CI 1.11 to 2.09, P = 0.009; CC/AC versus AA: OR = 1.28, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.48, P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis based on ethnicity further suggested that CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism was associated with risk of lung cancer in Caucasians. These results from the meta-analysis suggest that CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism contributes to risk of lung cancer.
    Tumor Biology 11/2013; · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Some investigators argue that controlling for self-reported race or ethnicity, either in statistical analysis or in study design, is sufficient to mitigate unwanted influence from population stratification. In this report, we evaluated the effectiveness of a study design involving matching on self-reported ethnicity and race in minimizing bias due to population stratification within an ethnically admixed population in California. We estimated individual genetic ancestry using structured association methods and a panel of ancestry informative markers, and observed no statistically significant difference in distribution of genetic ancestry between cases and controls (P=0.46). Stratification by Hispanic ethnicity showed similar results. We evaluated potential confounding by genetic ancestry after adjustment for race and ethnicity for 1260 candidate gene SNPs, and found no major impact (>10%) on risk estimates. In conclusion, we found no evidence of confounding of genetic risk estimates by population substructure using this matched design. Our study provides strong evidence supporting the race- and ethnicity-matched case-control study design as an effective approach to minimizing systematic bias due to differences in genetic ancestry between cases and controls.
    Epidemiology (Sunnyvale, Calif.). 09/2011; 1:101.

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from