Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Liu J, Prager-van der Smissen WJC, Collée JM, Bolla MK, Wang Q, Michailidou K, et al.
    Sci Rep, 2020 Jun 16;10(1):9688.
    PMID: 32546843 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-65665-y
    In breast cancer, high levels of homeobox protein Hox-B13 (HOXB13) have been associated with disease progression of ER-positive breast cancer patients and resistance to tamoxifen treatment. Since HOXB13 p.G84E is a prostate cancer risk allele, we evaluated the association between HOXB13 germline mutations and breast cancer risk in a previous study consisting of 3,270 familial non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer cases and 2,327 controls from the Netherlands. Although both recurrent HOXB13 mutations p.G84E and p.R217C were not associated with breast cancer risk, the risk estimation for p.R217C was not very precise. To provide more conclusive evidence regarding the role of HOXB13 in breast cancer susceptibility, we here evaluated the association between HOXB13 mutations and increased breast cancer risk within 81 studies of the international Breast Cancer Association Consortium containing 68,521 invasive breast cancer patients and 54,865 controls. Both HOXB13 p.G84E and p.R217C did not associate with the development of breast cancer in European women, neither in the overall analysis (OR = 1.035, 95% CI = 0.859-1.246, P = 0.718 and OR = 0.798, 95% CI = 0.482-1.322, P = 0.381 respectively), nor in specific high-risk subgroups or breast cancer subtypes. Thus, although involved in breast cancer progression, HOXB13 is not a material breast cancer susceptibility gene.
  2. Morra A, Jung AY, Behrens S, Keeman R, Ahearn TU, Anton-Culver H, et al.
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2021 Apr;30(4):623-642.
    PMID: 33500318 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0924
    BACKGROUND: It is not known whether modifiable lifestyle factors that predict survival after invasive breast cancer differ by subtype.

    METHODS: We analyzed data for 121,435 women diagnosed with breast cancer from 67 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium with 16,890 deaths (8,554 breast cancer specific) over 10 years. Cox regression was used to estimate associations between risk factors and 10-year all-cause mortality and breast cancer-specific mortality overall, by estrogen receptor (ER) status, and by intrinsic-like subtype.

    RESULTS: There was no evidence of heterogeneous associations between risk factors and mortality by subtype (P adj > 0.30). The strongest associations were between all-cause mortality and BMI ≥30 versus 18.5-25 kg/m2 [HR (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19 (1.06-1.34)]; current versus never smoking [1.37 (1.27-1.47)], high versus low physical activity [0.43 (0.21-0.86)], age ≥30 years versus <20 years at first pregnancy [0.79 (0.72-0.86)]; >0-<5 years versus ≥10 years since last full-term birth [1.31 (1.11-1.55)]; ever versus never use of oral contraceptives [0.91 (0.87-0.96)]; ever versus never use of menopausal hormone therapy, including current estrogen-progestin therapy [0.61 (0.54-0.69)]. Similar associations with breast cancer mortality were weaker; for example, 1.11 (1.02-1.21) for current versus never smoking.

    CONCLUSIONS: We confirm associations between modifiable lifestyle factors and 10-year all-cause mortality. There was no strong evidence that associations differed by ER status or intrinsic-like subtype.

    IMPACT: Given the large dataset and lack of evidence that associations between modifiable risk factors and 10-year mortality differed by subtype, these associations could be cautiously used in prognostication models to inform patient-centered care.

  3. Mueller SH, Lai AG, Valkovskaya M, Michailidou K, Bolla MK, Wang Q, et al.
    Genome Med, 2023 Jan 26;15(1):7.
    PMID: 36703164 DOI: 10.1186/s13073-022-01152-5
    BACKGROUND: Low-frequency variants play an important role in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility. Gene-based methods can increase power by combining multiple variants in the same gene and help identify target genes.

    METHODS: We evaluated the potential of gene-based aggregation in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium cohorts including 83,471 cases and 59,199 controls. Low-frequency variants were aggregated for individual genes' coding and regulatory regions. Association results in European ancestry samples were compared to single-marker association results in the same cohort. Gene-based associations were also combined in meta-analysis across individuals with European, Asian, African, and Latin American and Hispanic ancestry.

    RESULTS: In European ancestry samples, 14 genes were significantly associated (q 

  4. Baxter JS, Johnson N, Tomczyk K, Gillespie A, Maguire S, Brough R, et al.
    Am J Hum Genet, 2021 Jul 01;108(7):1190-1203.
    PMID: 34146516 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.05.013
    A combination of genetic and functional approaches has identified three independent breast cancer risk loci at 2q35. A recent fine-scale mapping analysis to refine these associations resulted in 1 (signal 1), 5 (signal 2), and 42 (signal 3) credible causal variants at these loci. We used publicly available in silico DNase I and ChIP-seq data with in vitro reporter gene and CRISPR assays to annotate signals 2 and 3. We identified putative regulatory elements that enhanced cell-type-specific transcription from the IGFBP5 promoter at both signals (30- to 40-fold increased expression by the putative regulatory element at signal 2, 2- to 3-fold by the putative regulatory element at signal 3). We further identified one of the five credible causal variants at signal 2, a 1.4 kb deletion (esv3594306), as the likely causal variant; the deletion allele of this variant was associated with an average additional increase in IGFBP5 expression of 1.3-fold (MCF-7) and 2.2-fold (T-47D). We propose a model in which the deletion allele of esv3594306 juxtaposes two transcription factor binding regions (annotated by estrogen receptor alpha ChIP-seq peaks) to generate a single extended regulatory element. This regulatory element increases cell-type-specific expression of the tumor suppressor gene IGFBP5 and, thereby, reduces risk of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (odds ratio = 0.77, 95% CI 0.74-0.81, p = 3.1 × 10-31).
  5. Milne RL, Kuchenbaecker KB, Michailidou K, Beesley J, Kar S, Lindström S, et al.
    Nat Genet, 2017 Dec;49(12):1767-1778.
    PMID: 29058716 DOI: 10.1038/ng.3785
    Most common breast cancer susceptibility variants have been identified through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of predominantly estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease. We conducted a GWAS using 21,468 ER-negative cases and 100,594 controls combined with 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer), all of European origin. We identified independent associations at P < 5 × 10-8 with ten variants at nine new loci. At P < 0.05, we replicated associations with 10 of 11 variants previously reported in ER-negative disease or BRCA1 mutation carrier GWAS and observed consistent associations with ER-negative disease for 105 susceptibility variants identified by other studies. These 125 variants explain approximately 16% of the familial risk of this breast cancer subtype. There was high genetic correlation (0.72) between risk of ER-negative breast cancer and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. These findings may lead to improved risk prediction and inform further fine-mapping and functional work to better understand the biological basis of ER-negative breast cancer.
  6. Michailidou K, Lindström S, Dennis J, Beesley J, Hui S, Kar S, et al.
    Nature, 2017 Nov 02;551(7678):92-94.
    PMID: 29059683 DOI: 10.1038/nature24284
    Breast cancer risk is influenced by rare coding variants in susceptibility genes, such as BRCA1, and many common, mostly non-coding variants. However, much of the genetic contribution to breast cancer risk remains unknown. Here we report the results of a genome-wide association study of breast cancer in 122,977 cases and 105,974 controls of European ancestry and 14,068 cases and 13,104 controls of East Asian ancestry. We identified 65 new loci that are associated with overall breast cancer risk at P 
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links