Search

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 200 common genetic variants independently associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, but the causal variants and target genes are mostly unknown. We sought to fine-map all known CRC risk loci using GWAS data from 100,204 cases and 154,587 controls of East Asian and European ancestry. Our stepwise conditional analyses revealed 238 independent association signals of CRC risk, each with a set of credible causal variants (CCVs), of which 28 signals had a single CCV. Our cis-eQTL/mQTL and colocalization analyses using colorectal tissue-specific transcriptome and methylome data separately from 1299 and 321 individuals, along with functional genomic investigation, uncovered 136 putative CRC susceptibility genes, including 56 genes not previously reported. Analyses of single-cell RNA-seq data from colorectal tissues revealed 17 putative CRC susceptibility genes with distinct expression patterns in specific cell types. Analyses of whole exome sequencing data provided additional support for several target genes identified in this study as CRC susceptibility genes. Enrichment analyses of the 136 genes uncover pathways not previously linked to CRC risk. Our study substantially expanded association signals for CRC and provided additional insight into the biological mechanisms underlying CRC development., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. We conducted a genome-wide association study meta-analysis of 100,204 CRC cases and 154,587 controls of European and east Asian ancestry, identifying 205 independent risk associations, of which 50 were unreported. We performed integrative genomic, transcriptomic and methylomic analyses across large bowel mucosa and other tissues. Transcriptome- and methylome-wide association studies revealed an additional 53 risk associations. We identified 155 high-confidence effector genes functionally linked to CRC risk, many of which had no previously established role in CRC. These have multiple different functions and specifically indicate that variation in normal colorectal homeostasis, proliferation, cell adhesion, migration, immunity and microbial interactions determines CRC risk. Crosstissue analyses indicated that over a third of effector genes most probably act outside the colonic mucosa. Our findings provide insights into colorectal oncogenesis and highlight potential targets across tissues for new CRC treatment and chemoprevention strategies., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the benefit of combining polygenic risk scores with the QCancer-10 (colorectal cancer) prediction model for non-genetic risk to identify people at highest risk of colorectal cancer., Design: Population based cohort study., Setting: Data from the UK Biobank study, collected between March 2006 and July 2010., Participants: 434 587 individuals with complete data for genetics and QCancer-10 predictions were included in the QCancer-10 plus polygenic risk score modelling and validation cohorts., Main Outcome Measures: Prediction of colorectal cancer diagnosis by genetic, non-genetic, and combined risk models. Using data from UK Biobank, six different polygenic risk scores for colorectal cancer were developed using LDpred2 polygenic risk score software, clumping, and thresholding approaches, and a model based on genome-wide significant polymorphisms. The top performing genome-wide polygenic risk score and the score containing genome-wide significant polymorphisms were combined with QCancer-10 and performance was compared with QCancer-10 alone. Case-control (logistic regression) and time-to-event (Cox proportional hazards) analyses were used to evaluate risk model performance in men and women., Results: Polygenic risk scores derived using the LDpred2 program performed best, with an odds ratio per standard deviation of 1.584 (95% confidence interval 1.536 to 1.633), and top age and sex adjusted C statistic of 0.733 (95% confidence interval 0.710 to 0.753) in logistic regression models in the validation cohort. Integrated QCancer-10 plus polygenic risk score models out-performed QCancer-10 alone. In men, the integrated LDpred2 model produced a C statistic of 0.730 (0.720 to 0.741) and explained variation of 28.2% (26.3 to 30.1), compared with 0.693 (0.682 to 0.704) and 21.0% (18.9 to 23.1) for QCancer-10 alone. In women, the C statistic for the integrated LDpred2 model was 0.687 (0.673 to 0.702) and explained variation was 21.0% (18.7 to 23.7), compared with 0.645 (0.631 to 0.659) and 12.4% (10.3 to 14.6) for QCancer-10 alone. In the top 20% of individuals at highest absolute risk, the sensitivity and specificity of the integrated LDpred2 models for predicting colorectal cancer diagnosis was 47.8% and 80.3% respectively in men, and 42.7% and 80.1% respectively in women, with increases in absolute risk in the top 5% of risk in men of 3.47-fold and in women of 2.77-fold compared with the median. Illustrative decision curve analysis indicated a small incremental improvement in net benefit with QCancer-10 plus polygenic risk score models compared with QCancer-10 alone., Conclusions: Integrating polygenic risk scores with QCancer-10 modestly improves risk prediction over use of QCancer-10 alone. Given that QCancer-10 data can be obtained relatively easily from health records, use of polygenic risk score in risk stratified population screening for colorectal cancer currently has no clear justification. The added benefit, cost effectiveness, and acceptability of polygenic risk scores should be carefully evaluated in a real life screening setting before implementation in the general population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work other than those listed above; JH-C led the development of the QCancer-10 algorithm. JH-C is founder and shareholder of ClinRisk Ltd which supplies free open-source software for research purposes and also licenses other closed source software for a fee to implement risk prediction tools into NHS computer systems outside the submitted work and was its medical director until June 2019, JH-C is director of the QResearch database—a not-for-profit collaboration between University of Oxford and EMIS (commercial supplier of NHS computer systems), and is an adviser to the CMO in England on cancer screening; JEE has served on clinical advisory boards for Lumendi, Boston Scientific, and Paion, has served on the clinical advisory board and owns share options in Satisfai Health, reports speaker fees from Falk, Janssen and Medtronic, and serves on the ACPGBI/BSG guideline group for implementation faecal immunochemical testing for the detection of colorectal cancer in patients with symptoms suspicious of colorectal cancer., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Constitutional loss of function (LOF) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in pattern recognition receptors FPR1, TLR3, and TLR4 have previously been reported to predict oxaliplatin benefit in colorectal cancer. Confirmation of this association could substantially improve patient stratification., Methods: We performed a retrospective biomarker analysis of the Short Course in Oncology Therapy (SCOT) and COIN/COIN-B trials. Participant status for LOF variants in FPR1 (rs867228), TLR3 (rs3775291), and TLR4 (rs4986790/rs4986791) was determined by genotyping array or genotype imputation. Associations between LOF variants and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox regression, adjusted for confounders, using additive, dominant, and recessive genetic models. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Our validation study populations included 2929 and 1948 patients in the SCOT and COIN/COIN-B cohorts, respectively, of whom 2728 and 1672 patients had functional status of all three SNPs determined. We found no evidence of an association between any SNP and DFS in the SCOT cohort, or with OS in either cohort, irrespective of the type of model used. This included models for which an association was previously reported for rs867228 (recessive model, multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for DFS in SCOT = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99 to 1.45, P = .07; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.63 to 1.34, P = .66), and rs4986790 (dominant model, multivariable-adjusted HR for DFS in SCOT = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.13, P = .27; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.31, P = .40)., Conclusion: In this prespecified analysis of two large clinical trials, we found no evidence that constitutional LOF SNPs in FPR1, TLR3, or TLR4 are associated with differential benefit from oxaliplatin. Our results suggest these SNPs are unlikely to be clinically useful biomarkers., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and has a strong heritable basis. We report a genome-wide association analysis of 34,627 CRC cases and 71,379 controls of European ancestry that identifies SNPs at 31 new CRC risk loci. We also identify eight independent risk SNPs at the new and previously reported European CRC loci, and a further nine CRC SNPs at loci previously only identified in Asian populations. We use in situ promoter capture Hi-C (CHi-C), gene expression, and in silico annotation methods to identify likely target genes of CRC SNPs. Whilst these new SNP associations implicate target genes that are enriched for known CRC pathways such as Wnt and BMP, they also highlight novel pathways with no prior links to colorectal tumourigenesis. These findings provide further insight into CRC susceptibility and enhance the prospects of applying genetic risk scores to personalised screening and prevention.

Background: Precision cancer medicine depends on defining distinct tumour subgroups using biomarkers that may occur at very modest frequencies. One such subgroup comprises patients with exceptionally mutated (ultramutated) cancers caused by mutations that impair DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE) proofreading., Methods: We examined the association of POLE proofreading domain mutation with clinicopathological variables and immune response in colorectal cancers from clinical trials (VICTOR, QUASAR2, and PETACC-3) and colorectal cancer cohorts (Leiden University Medical Centre 1 and 2, Oslo 1 and 2, Bern, AMC-AJCC-II, and Epicolon-1). We subsequently investigated its association with prognosis in stage II/III colorectal cancer by Cox regression of pooled individual patient data from more than 4500 cases from these studies., Findings: Pathogenic somatic POLE mutations were detected in 66 (1·0%) of 6517 colorectal cancers, and were mutually exclusive with mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D) in the 6277 cases for whom both markers were determined (none of 66 vs 833 [13·4%] of 6211; p<0·0001). Compared with cases with wild-type POLE, cases with POLE mutations were younger at diagnosis (median 54·5 years vs 67·2 years; p<0·0001), were more frequently male (50 [75·8%] of 66 vs 3577 [55·5%] of 6445; p=0·0010), more frequently had right-sided tumour location (44 [68·8%] of 64 vs 2463 [39·8%] of 6193; p<0·0001), and were diagnosed at an earlier disease stage (p=0·006, χ 2 test for trend). Compared with mismatch repair proficient (MMR-P) POLE wild-type tumours, POLE-mutant colorectal cancers displayed increased CD8+ lymphocyte infiltration and expression of cytotoxic T-cell markers and effector cytokines, similar in extent to that observed in immunogenic MMR-D cancers. Both POLE mutation and MMR-D were associated with significantly reduced risk of recurrence compared with MMR-P colorectal cancers in multivariable analysis (HR 0·34 [95% CI 0·11-0·76]; p=0·0060 and 0·72 [0·60-0·87]; p=0·00035), although the difference between the groups was not significant., Interpretation: POLE proofreading domain mutations identify a subset of immunogenic colorectal cancers with excellent prognosis. This association underscores the importance of rare biomarkers in precision cancer medicine, but also raises important questions about how to identify and implement them in practice., Funding: Cancer Research UK, Academy of Medical Sciences, Health Foundation, EU, ERC, NIHR, Wellcome Trust, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Digestive Foundation., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Polymerases ε and δ are the main enzymes that replicate eukaryotic DNA. Accurate replication occurs through Watson-Crick base pairing and also through the action of the polymerases' exonuclease (proofreading) domains. We have recently shown that germline exonuclease domain mutations (EDMs) of POLE and POLD1 confer a high risk of multiple colorectal adenomas and carcinoma (CRC). POLD1 mutations also predispose to endometrial cancer (EC). These mutations are associated with high penetrance and dominant inheritance, although the phenotype can be variable. We have named the condition polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis (PPAP). Somatic POLE EDMs have also been found in sporadic CRCs and ECs, although very few somatic POLD1 EDMs have been detected. Both the germline and the somatic DNA polymerase EDMs cause an 'ultramutated', apparently microsatellite-stable, type of cancer, sometimes leading to over a million base substitutions per tumour. Here, we present the evidence for POLE and POLD1 as important contributors to the pathogenesis of CRC and EC, and highlight some of the key questions in this emerging field., (Copyright © 2013 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)