Interactions between genetic variants and breast cancer risk factors in the breast and prostate cancer cohort consortium

Genomic Epidemiology Group, German Cancer Research Center (Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment (Impact Factor: 15.16). 08/2011; 103(16):1252-63. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr265
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recently, several genome-wide association studies have identified various genetic susceptibility loci for breast cancer. Relatively little is known about the possible interactions between these loci and the established risk factors for breast cancer.
To assess interactions between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and established risk factors, we prospectively collected DNA samples and questionnaire data from 8576 breast cancer case subjects and 11 892 control subjects nested within the National Cancer Institute's Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). We genotyped 17 germline SNPs (FGFR2-rs2981582, FGFR2-rs3750817, TNRC9-rs3803662, 2q35-rs13387042, MAP3K1-rs889312, 8q24-rs13281615, CASP8-rs1045485, LSP1-rs3817198, COL1A1-rs2075555, COX11-rs6504950, RNF146-rs2180341, 6q25-rs2046210, SLC4A7-rs4973768, NOTCH2-rs11249433, 5p12-rs4415084, 5p12-rs10941679, RAD51L1-rs999737), and odds ratios were estimated by logistic regression to confirm previously reported associations with breast cancer risk. We performed likelihood ratio test to assess interactions between 17 SNPs and nine established risk factors (age at menarche, parity, age at menopause, use of hormone replacement therapy, family history, height, body mass index, smoking status, and alcohol consumption), and a correction for multiple testing of 153 tests (adjusted P value threshold = .05/153 = 3 × 10(-4)) was done. Case-case comparisons were performed for possible differential associations of polymorphisms by subgroups of tumor stage, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, and age at diagnosis. All statistical tests were two-sided.
We confirmed the association of 14 SNPs with breast cancer risk (P(trend) = 2.57 × 10(-3) -3.96 × 10(-19)). Three SNPs (LSP1-rs3817198, COL1A1-rs2075555, and RNF146-rs2180341) did not show association with breast cancer risk. After accounting for multiple testing, no statistically significant interactions were detected between the 17 SNPs and the nine risk factors. We also confirmed that SNPs in FGFR2 and TNRC9 were associated with greater risk of estrogen receptor-positive than estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (P(heterogeneity) = .0016 for FGFR2-rs2981582 and P(heterogeneity) = .0053 for TNRC9-rs3803662). SNP 5p12-rs10941679 was statistically significantly associated with greater risk of progesterone receptor-positive than progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer (P(heterogeneity) = .0028).
This study does not support the hypothesis that known common breast cancer susceptibility loci strongly modify the associations between established risk factors and breast cancer.

Download full-text


Available from: Maria-Jose Sanchez, Jul 28, 2015
  • Source
    • "Several studies have assessed the impact of these newly discovered SNPs and found that the inclusion of SNP testing alongside family history and other classic markers of breast cancer risk enhances the accuracy of risk assessment (Brentnall et al. 2014; Campa et al. 2011; Heald et al. 2012; Mealiffe et al. 2010). One study described family history and personal genome screening as " complementary tools for cancer risk assessment " (Heald et al. 2012, p 547), while another discussed the improvement in classification of breast cancer risks when SNP risk factors were combined with clinical risk factors (Mealiffe et al. 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have the potential to improve personalized medicine in breast cancer care. As new SNPs are discovered, further enhancing risk classification, SNP testing may serve to complement family history and phenotypic risk factors when assessed in a clinical setting. SNP analysis is particularly relevant to high-risk women who may seek out such information to guide their decision-making around risk-reduction. However, little is known about how high-risk women may respond to SNP testing with regard to clinical decision-making. We examined high-risk women's interest in SNP testing for breast cancer risk through an online survey of hypothetical testing scenarios. Women stated their preferences for sharing test results and selected the most likely follow-up action they would pursue in each of the test result scenarios (above average and below average risk for breast cancer). Four hundred seventy-eight women participated. Most women (89 %) did not know what a SNP was prior to the study. Once SNP testing was described, 75 % were interested in SNP testing. Participants stated an interest in lifestyle interventions for risk-reduction and wanted to discuss their testing results with their doctor or a genetic counselor. Women are interested in SNP testing and are prepared to make lifestyle changes based on testing results. Women's preference for discussing testing results with a healthcare provider aligns with the current trend towards SNP testing in a clinical setting.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 12/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10897-014-9803-7 · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Developing improved methods for breast cancer risk prediction could facilitate the targeting of interventions to women at highest risk, thereby reducing mortality, while sparing low-risk women the costs and inconvenience of unnecessary testing and procedures. However, currently available risk assessment tools fall short of achieving accurate individual risk prediction, precluding implementation of this approach. Improving these tools will require the identification of new methods of assessing risk and increasing the accuracy of existing risk indicators. We review four emerging topics that may have importance for breast cancer risk assessment: etiological heterogeneity, genetic susceptibility, mammographic breast density, and assessment of breast involution.
    03/2013; 2(1). DOI:10.1007/s13669-012-0034-3
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Women's Health Study (WHS) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the balance of benefits and risks of low-dose aspirin and vitamin E in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer in women. A total of 39,876 female health professionals, age 45 years or older and without a history of cardiovascular disease or cancer (other than nonmelanoma skin cancer), were randomized in a 2x2 factorial design to one of four treatment groups: active aspirin and vitamin E placebo, aspirin placebo and active vitamin E, both active agents, or both placebos. The process of randomization was successful, as evidenced by the equal distribution of a large number of baseline demographic, lifestyle, and health history characteristics among the four treatment groups. Similar distribution of known potential confounders, as well as the large sample size, provides reassuring evidence that unmeasured or unknown potential confounders are also equally distributed. As expected in a clinical trial, the women in the study are healthier in some respects than the general population, but they have very comparable rates of obesity, hypertension, and elevated cholesterol. With adequate duration of treatment and follow-up, this trial will provide important and relevant information on the balance of benefits and risks of aspirin and vitamin E supplementation in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer in women.
    Journal of Women s Health &amp Gender-Based Medicine 01/2000; 9(1):19-27. DOI:10.1089/152460900318911
Show more