METHODS: The prevalence of G6PD deficiency among 408 Thai participants diagnosed with malaria by microscopy (71), and malaria-negative controls (337), was assessed using a phenotypic test based on water-soluble tetrazolium salts. High-resolution melting (HRM) curve analysis was developed from a previous study to enable the detection of 15 common missense, synonymous and intronic G6PD mutations in Asian populations. The identified mutations were subjected to biochemical and structural characterisation to understand the molecular mechanisms underlying enzyme deficiency.
RESULTS: Based on phenotypic testing, the prevalence of G6PD deficiency (T) and intronic (c.1365-13T>C and c.486-34delT) mutations was detected with intermediate to normal enzyme activity. The double missense mutations were less catalytically active than their corresponding single missense mutations, resulting in severe enzyme deficiency. While the mutations had a minor effect on binding affinity, structural instability was a key contributor to the enzyme deficiency observed in G6PD-deficient individuals.
CONCLUSIONS: With varying degrees of enzyme deficiency, G6PD genotyping can be used as a complement to phenotypic screening to identify those who are eligible for 8-aminoquinolines. The information gained from this study could be useful for management and treatment of malaria, as well as for the prevention of unanticipated reactions to certain medications and foods in the studied population.
METHODS: Using LDScore regression, we explored the genetic correlation between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. To identify loci associated with the risk of both cancers, we implemented a pipeline of statistical genetic analyses (i.e., inverse-variance meta-analysis, colocalization, and M-values) and performed analyses stratified by subtype. Candidate target genes were then prioritized using functional genomic data.
RESULTS: Genetic correlation analysis revealed significant genetic correlation between the two cancers (rG = 0.43, P = 2.66 × 10-5). We found seven loci associated with risk for both cancers (P Bonferroni < 2.4 × 10-9). In addition, four novel subgenome-wide regions at 7p22.2, 7q22.1, 9p12, and 11q13.3 were identified (P < 5 × 10-7). Promoter-associated HiChIP chromatin loops from immortalized endometrium and ovarian cell lines and expression quantitative trait loci data highlighted candidate target genes for further investigation.
CONCLUSIONS: Using cross-cancer GWAS meta-analysis, we have identified several joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci and candidate target genes for future functional analysis.
IMPACT: Our research highlights the shared genetic relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Further studies in larger sample sets are required to confirm our findings.