Search

Your search keyword '"Greene, Mark H"' showing total 1,375 results
Start Over Author "Greene, Mark H"
1,375 results on '"Greene, Mark H"'

5. Cover

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

7. Index

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

10. Foreword

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

16. Acknowledgments

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

17. Chapter 3. Defining Risk

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

21. About the Authors

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

30. Notes

Author

Friedman, Sue, Sutphen, Rebecca, Steligo, Kathy, and Greene, Mark H.

Published
2012

31. Copy number variants as modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers

Author

Hakkaart, Christopher, Pearson, John F, Marquart, Louise, Dennis, Joe, Wiggins, George AR, Barnes, Daniel R, Robinson, Bridget A, Mace, Peter D, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Arun, Banu K, Azzollini, Jacopo, Balmaña, Judith, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Belhadj, Sami, Berger, Lieke, Blok, Marinus J, Boonen, Susanne E, Borde, Julika, Bradbury, Angela R, Brunet, Joan, Buys, Saundra S, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Collonge-Rame, Marie-Agnès, Cook, Jackie, Cosgrove, Casey, Couch, Fergus J, Daly, Mary B, Dandiker, Sita, Davidson, Rosemarie, de la Hoya, Miguel, de Putter, Robin, Delnatte, Capucine, Dhawan, Mallika, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Domchek, Susan M, Donaldson, Alan, Eason, Jacqueline, Easton, Douglas F, Ehrencrona, Hans, Engel, Christoph, Evans, D Gareth, Faust, Ulrike, Feliubadaló, Lidia, Fostira, Florentia, Friedman, Eitan, Frone, Megan, Frost, Debra, Garber, Judy, Gayther, Simon A, Gehrig, Andrea, Gesta, Paul, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldgar, David E, Greene, Mark H, Hahnen, Eric, Hake, Christopher R, Hamann, Ute, Hansen, Thomas VO, Hauke, Jan, Hentschel, Julia, Herold, Natalie, Honisch, Ellen, Hulick, Peter J, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Izatt, Louise, Izquierdo, Angel, Jakubowska, Anna, James, Paul A, Janavicius, Ramunas, John, Esther M, Joseph, Vijai, Karlan, Beth Y, Kemp, Zoe, Kirk, Judy, Konstantopoulou, Irene, Koudijs, Marco, Kwong, Ava, Laitman, Yael, Lalloo, Fiona, Lasset, Christine, Lautrup, Charlotte, Lazaro, Conxi, Legrand, Clémentine, Leslie, Goska, Lesueur, Fabienne, Mai, Phuong L, Manoukian, Siranoush, Mari, Véronique, Martens, John WM, McGuffog, Lesley, Mebirouk, Noura, Meindl, Alfons, Miller, Austin, and Montagna, Marco

Subjects
Human Genome, Prevention, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Genetics, Aetiology, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Breast Neoplasms, DNA Copy Number Variations, Female, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Heterozygote, Humans, RNA, Messenger, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, SWE-BRCA Investigators, kConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators
Abstract

The contribution of germline copy number variants (CNVs) to risk of developing cancer in individuals with pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants remains relatively unknown. We conducted the largest genome-wide analysis of CNVs in 15,342 BRCA1 and 10,740 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. We used these results to prioritise a candidate breast cancer risk-modifier gene for laboratory analysis and biological validation. Notably, the HR for deletions in BRCA1 suggested an elevated breast cancer risk estimate (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.21), 95% confidence interval (95% CI = 1.09-1.35) compared with non-CNV pathogenic variants. In contrast, deletions overlapping SULT1A1 suggested a decreased breast cancer risk (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers. Functional analyses of SULT1A1 showed that reduced mRNA expression in pathogenic BRCA1 variant cells was associated with reduced cellular proliferation and reduced DNA damage after treatment with DNA damaging agents. These data provide evidence that deleterious variants in BRCA1 plus SULT1A1 deletions contribute to variable breast cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers.

Published
2022

32. Cancer Risks Associated With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Pathogenic Variants

Author

Li, Shuai, Silvestri, Valentina, Leslie, Goska, Rebbeck, Timothy R, Neuhausen, Susan L, Hopper, John L, Nielsen, Henriette Roed, Lee, Andrew, Yang, Xin, McGuffog, Lesley, Parsons, Michael T, Andrulis, Irene L, Arnold, Norbert, Belotti, Muriel, Borg, Åke, Buecher, Bruno, Buys, Saundra S, Caputo, Sandrine M, Chung, Wendy K, Colas, Chrystelle, Colonna, Sarah V, Cook, Jackie, Daly, Mary B, de la Hoya, Miguel, de Pauw, Antoine, Delhomelle, Hélène, Eason, Jacqueline, Engel, Christoph, Evans, D Gareth, Faust, Ulrike, Fehm, Tanja N, Fostira, Florentia, Fountzilas, George, Frone, Megan, Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa, Garre, Pilar, Gauthier-Villars, Marion, Gehrig, Andrea, Glendon, Gord, Goldgar, David E, Golmard, Lisa, Greene, Mark H, Hahnen, Eric, Hamann, Ute, Hanson, Helen, Hassan, Tiara, Hentschel, Julia, Horvath, Judit, Izatt, Louise, Janavicius, Ramunas, Jiao, Yue, John, Esther M, Karlan, Beth Y, Kim, Sung-Won, Konstantopoulou, Irene, Kwong, Ava, Laugé, Anthony, Lee, Jong Won, Lesueur, Fabienne, Mebirouk, Noura, Meindl, Alfons, Mouret-Fourme, Emmanuelle, Musgrave, Hannah, Yie, Joanne Ngeow Yuen, Niederacher, Dieter, Park, Sue K, Pedersen, Inge Sokilde, Ramser, Juliane, Ramus, Susan J, Rantala, Johanna, Rashid, Muhammad U, Reichl, Florian, Ritter, Julia, Rump, Andreas, Santamariña, Marta, Saule, Claire, Schmidt, Gunnar, Schmutzler, Rita K, Senter, Leigha, Shariff, Saba, Singer, Christian F, Southey, Melissa C, Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique, Sutter, Christian, Tan, Yen, Teo, Soo Hwang, Terry, Mary Beth, Thomassen, Mads, Tischkowitz, Marc, Toland, Amanda E, Torres, Diana, Vega, Ana, Wagner, Sebastian A, Wang-Gohrke, Shan, Wappenschmidt, Barbara, Weber, Bernhard HF, Yannoukakos, Drakoulis, Spurdle, Amanda B, Easton, Douglas F, and Chenevix-Trench, Georgia

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Prostate Cancer, Women's Health, Digestive Diseases, Breast Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, Prevention, Cancer, Urologic Diseases, Rare Diseases, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Breast Neoplasms, Breast Neoplasms, Male, Female, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Heterozygote, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Mutation, Ovarian Neoplasms, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Risk, Clinical Sciences, Oncology & Carcinogenesis, Oncology and carcinogenesis
Abstract

PurposeTo provide precise age-specific risk estimates of cancers other than female breast and ovarian cancers associated with pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 for effective cancer risk management.MethodsWe used data from 3,184 BRCA1 and 2,157 BRCA2 families in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 to estimate age-specific relative (RR) and absolute risks for 22 first primary cancer types adjusting for family ascertainment.ResultsBRCA1 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 4.30; 95% CI, 1.09 to 16.96), pancreatic (RR = 2.36; 95% CI, 1.51 to 3.68), and stomach (RR = 2.17; 95% CI, 1.25 to 3.77) cancers. Associations with colorectal and gallbladder cancers were also suggested. BRCA2 PVs were associated with risks of male breast (RR = 44.0; 95% CI, 21.3 to 90.9), stomach (RR = 3.69; 95% CI, 2.40 to 5.67), pancreatic (RR = 3.34; 95% CI, 2.21 to 5.06), and prostate (RR = 2.22; 95% CI, 1.63 to 3.03) cancers. The stomach cancer RR was higher for females than males (6.89 v 2.76; P = .04). The absolute risks to age 80 years ranged from 0.4% for male breast cancer to approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer for BRCA1 carriers and from approximately 2.5% for pancreatic cancer to 27% for prostate cancer for BRCA2 carriers.ConclusionIn addition to female breast and ovarian cancers, BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs are associated with increased risks of male breast, pancreatic, stomach, and prostate (only BRCA2 PVs) cancers, but not with the risks of other previously suggested cancers. The estimated age-specific risks will refine cancer risk management in men and women with BRCA1/2 PVs.

Published
2022

33. Correction: Polygenic risk modeling for prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer risk

Author

Dareng, Eileen O, Tyrer, Jonathan P, Barnes, Daniel R, Jones, Michelle R, Yang, Xin, Aben, Katja KH, Adank, Muriel A, Agata, Simona, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Antonenkova, Natalia N, Aravantinos, Gerasimos, Arun, Banu K, Augustinsson, Annelie, Balmaña, Judith, Bandera, Elisa V, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Barrowdale, Daniel, Beckmann, Matthias W, Beeghly-Fadiel, Alicia, Benitez, Javier, Bermisheva, Marina, Bernardini, Marcus Q, Bjorge, Line, Black, Amanda, Bogdanova, Natalia V, Bonanni, Bernardo, Borg, Ake, Brenton, James D, Budzilowska, Agnieszka, Butzow, Ralf, Buys, Saundra S, Cai, Hui, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Cannioto, Rikki, Cassingham, Hayley, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Chen, Kexin, Chiew, Yoke-Eng, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Colonna, Sarah, Cook, Linda S, Couch, Fergus J, Daly, Mary B, Dao, Fanny, Davies, Eleanor, de la Hoya, Miguel, de Putter, Robin, Dennis, Joe, DePersia, Allison, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Doherty, Jennifer A, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, du Bois, Andreas, Dürst, Matthias, Eccles, Diana M, Eliassen, Heather A, Engel, Christoph, Evans, Gareth D, Fasching, Peter A, Flanagan, James M, Fortner, Renée T, Machackova, Eva, Friedman, Eitan, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Gensini, Francesca, Giles, Graham G, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Goodman, Marc T, Greene, Mark H, Gronwald, Jacek, Hahnen, Eric, Haiman, Christopher A, Håkansson, Niclas, Hamann, Ute, Hansen, Thomas VO, Harris, Holly R, Hartman, Mikael, Heitz, Florian, Hildebrandt, Michelle AT, Høgdall, Estrid, Høgdall, Claus K, Hopper, John L, Huang, Ruea-Yea, Huff, Chad, Hulick, Peter J, Huntsman, David G, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Jakubowska, Anna, James, Paul A, and Janavicius, Ramunas

Subjects
GEMO Study Collaborators, GC-HBOC Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, OPAL Study Group, AOCS Group, KConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, OCAC Consortium, CIMBA Consortium, Genetics, Clinical Sciences, Genetics & Heredity
Published
2022

34. Polygenic risk modeling for prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer risk

Author

Dareng, Eileen O, Tyrer, Jonathan P, Barnes, Daniel R, Jones, Michelle R, Yang, Xin, Aben, Katja KH, Adank, Muriel A, Agata, Simona, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Antonenkova, Natalia N, Aravantinos, Gerasimos, Arun, Banu K, Augustinsson, Annelie, Balmaña, Judith, Bandera, Elisa V, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Barrowdale, Daniel, Beckmann, Matthias W, Beeghly-Fadiel, Alicia, Benitez, Javier, Bermisheva, Marina, Bernardini, Marcus Q, Bjorge, Line, Black, Amanda, Bogdanova, Natalia V, Bonanni, Bernardo, Borg, Ake, Brenton, James D, Budzilowska, Agnieszka, Butzow, Ralf, Buys, Saundra S, Cai, Hui, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Cannioto, Rikki, Cassingham, Hayley, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Chen, Kexin, Chiew, Yoke-Eng, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Colonna, Sarah, Cook, Linda S, Couch, Fergus J, Daly, Mary B, Dao, Fanny, Davies, Eleanor, de la Hoya, Miguel, de Putter, Robin, Dennis, Joe, DePersia, Allison, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Doherty, Jennifer A, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, du Bois, Andreas, Dürst, Matthias, Eccles, Diana M, Eliassen, Heather A, Engel, Christoph, Evans, Gareth D, Fasching, Peter A, Flanagan, James M, Fortner, Renée T, Machackova, Eva, Friedman, Eitan, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Gensini, Francesca, Giles, Graham G, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Goodman, Marc T, Greene, Mark H, Gronwald, Jacek, Hahnen, Eric, Haiman, Christopher A, Håkansson, Niclas, Hamann, Ute, Hansen, Thomas VO, Harris, Holly R, Hartman, Mikael, Heitz, Florian, Hildebrandt, Michelle AT, Høgdall, Estrid, Høgdall, Claus K, Hopper, John L, Huang, Ruea-Yea, Huff, Chad, Hulick, Peter J, Huntsman, David G, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Jakubowska, Anna, James, Paul A, and Janavicius, Ramunas

Subjects
Prevention, Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Rare Diseases, Good Health and Well Being, Bayes Theorem, Breast Neoplasms, Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial, Female, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Humans, Male, Ovarian Neoplasms, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, GEMO Study Collaborators, GC-HBOC Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, OPAL Study Group, AOCS Group, KConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, OCAC Consortium, CIMBA Consortium, Genetics, Clinical Sciences, Genetics & Heredity
Abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have the potential to improve risk stratification. Joint estimation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) effects in models could improve predictive performance over standard approaches of PRS construction. Here, we implemented computationally efficient, penalized, logistic regression models (lasso, elastic net, stepwise) to individual level genotype data and a Bayesian framework with continuous shrinkage, "select and shrink for summary statistics" (S4), to summary level data for epithelial non-mucinous ovarian cancer risk prediction. We developed the models in a dataset consisting of 23,564 non-mucinous EOC cases and 40,138 controls participating in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) and validated the best models in three populations of different ancestries: prospective data from 198,101 women of European ancestries; 7,669 women of East Asian ancestries; 1,072 women of African ancestries, and in 18,915 BRCA1 and 12,337 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestries. In the external validation data, the model with the strongest association for non-mucinous EOC risk derived from the OCAC model development data was the S4 model (27,240 SNPs) with odds ratios (OR) of 1.38 (95% CI: 1.28-1.48, AUC: 0.588) per unit standard deviation, in women of European ancestries; 1.14 (95% CI: 1.08-1.19, AUC: 0.538) in women of East Asian ancestries; 1.38 (95% CI: 1.21-1.58, AUC: 0.593) in women of African ancestries; hazard ratios of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.29-1.43, AUC: 0.592) in BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.35-1.64, AUC: 0.624) in BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. Incorporation of the S4 PRS in risk prediction models for ovarian cancer may have clinical utility in ovarian cancer prevention programs.

Published
2022

35. Germline Exome Sequencing for Men with Testicular Germ Cell Tumor Reveals Coding Defects in Chromosomal Segregation and Protein-targeting Genes

Author

Pyle, Louise C., Kim, Jung, Bradfield, Jonathan, Damrauer, Scott M., D'Andrea, Kurt, Einhorn, Lawrence H., Godse, Rama, Hakonarson, Hakon, Kanetsky, Peter A., Kember, Rachel L., Jacobs, Linda A., Maxwell, Kara N., Rader, Daniel J., Vaughn, David J., Weathers, Benita, Wubbenhorst, Bradley, Regeneron Genetics Center Research Team, Cancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Greene, Mark H., Nathanson, Katherine L., and Stewart, Douglas R.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

36. Author Correction: A case-only study to identify genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Author

Coignard, Juliette, Lush, Michael, Beesley, Jonathan, O'Mara, Tracy A, Dennis, Joe, Tyrer, Jonathan P, Barnes, Daniel R, McGuffog, Lesley, Leslie, Goska, Bolla, Manjeet K, Adank, Muriel A, Agata, Simona, Ahearn, Thomas, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Arndt, Volker, Arnold, Norbert, Aronson, Kristan J, Arun, Banu K, Augustinsson, Annelie, Azzollini, Jacopo, Barrowdale, Daniel, Baynes, Caroline, Becher, Heko, Bermisheva, Marina, Bernstein, Leslie, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Blomqvist, Carl, Bojesen, Stig E, Bonanni, Bernardo, Borg, Ake, Brauch, Hiltrud, Brenner, Hermann, Burwinkel, Barbara, Buys, Saundra S, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campa, Daniele, Carter, Brian D, Castelao, Jose E, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Clarke, Christine L, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, Collée, J Margriet, Conroy, Don M, Czene, Kamila, Daly, Mary B, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, Dos-Santos-Silva, Isabel, Dunning, Alison M, Dwek, Miriam, Eccles, Diana M, Eliassen, A Heather, Engel, Christoph, Eriksson, Mikael, Evans, D Gareth, Fasching, Peter A, Flyger, Henrik, Fostira, Florentia, Friedman, Eitan, Fritschi, Lin, Frost, Debra, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Gapstur, Susan M, Garber, Judy, Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa, García-Closas, Montserrat, García-Sáenz, José A, Gaudet, Mia M, Gayther, Simon A, Gehrig, Andrea, Georgoulias, Vassilios, Giles, Graham G, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldberg, Mark S, Goldgar, David E, González-Neira, Anna, Greene, Mark H, Guénel, Pascal, Haeberle, Lothar, Hahnen, Eric, Haiman, Christopher A, Håkansson, Niclas, Hall, Per, Hamann, Ute, Harrington, Patricia A, Hart, Steven N, He, Wei, Hogervorst, Frans BL, Hollestelle, Antoinette, and Hopper, John L

Subjects
GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, KConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, ABCTB Investigators, Cancer
Abstract

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23162-4.

Published
2021

37. A case-only study to identify genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Author

Coignard, Juliette, Lush, Michael, Beesley, Jonathan, O'Mara, Tracy A, Dennis, Joe, Tyrer, Jonathan P, Barnes, Daniel R, McGuffog, Lesley, Leslie, Goska, Bolla, Manjeet K, Adank, Muriel A, Agata, Simona, Ahearn, Thomas, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Arndt, Volker, Arnold, Norbert, Aronson, Kristan J, Arun, Banu K, Augustinsson, Annelie, Azzollini, Jacopo, Barrowdale, Daniel, Baynes, Caroline, Becher, Heiko, Bermisheva, Marina, Bernstein, Leslie, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Blomqvist, Carl, Bojesen, Stig E, Bonanni, Bernardo, Borg, Ake, Brauch, Hiltrud, Brenner, Hermann, Burwinkel, Barbara, Buys, Saundra S, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campa, Daniele, Carter, Brian D, Castelao, Jose E, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Clarke, Christine L, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, Collée, J Margriet, Conroy, Don M, Czene, Kamila, Daly, Mary B, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, Dos-Santos-Silva, Isabel, Dunning, Alison M, Dwek, Miriam, Eccles, Diana M, Eliassen, A Heather, Engel, Christoph, Eriksson, Mikael, Evans, D Gareth, Fasching, Peter A, Flyger, Henrik, Fostira, Florentia, Friedman, Eitan, Fritschi, Lin, Frost, Debra, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Gapstur, Susan M, Garber, Judy, Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa, García-Closas, Montserrat, García-Sáenz, José A, Gaudet, Mia M, Gayther, Simon A, Gehrig, Andrea, Georgoulias, Vassilios, Giles, Graham G, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldberg, Mark S, Goldgar, David E, González-Neira, Anna, Greene, Mark H, Guénel, Pascal, Haeberle, Lothar, Hahnen, Eric, Haiman, Christopher A, Håkansson, Niclas, Hall, Per, Hamann, Ute, Harrington, Patricia A, Hart, Steven N, He, Wei, Hogervorst, Frans BL, Hollestelle, Antoinette, and Hopper, John L

Subjects
GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, KConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, ABCTB Investigators, Humans, Breast Neoplasms, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Risk Factors, Genotype, Linkage Disequilibrium, Mutation, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Alleles, Quantitative Trait Loci, Adult, Middle Aged, Female, Genome-Wide Association Study, Breast Cancer, Prevention, Cancer, Genetic Testing, Human Genome, Genetics, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors
Abstract

Breast cancer (BC) risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers varies by genetic and familial factors. About 50 common variants have been shown to modify BC risk for mutation carriers. All but three, were identified in general population studies. Other mutation carrier-specific susceptibility variants may exist but studies of mutation carriers have so far been underpowered. We conduct a novel case-only genome-wide association study comparing genotype frequencies between 60,212 general population BC cases and 13,007 cases with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We identify robust novel associations for 2 variants with BC for BRCA1 and 3 for BRCA2 mutation carriers, P

Published
2021

38. Genome-wide Association Study of Bladder Cancer Reveals New Biological and Translational Insights

Author

Koutros, Stella, Kiemeney, Lambertus A., Pal Choudhury, Parichoy, Milne, Roger L., Lopez de Maturana, Evangelina, Ye, Yuanqing, Joseph, Vijai, Florez-Vargas, Oscar, Dyrskjøt, Lars, Figueroa, Jonine, Dutta, Diptavo, Giles, Graham G., Hildebrandt, Michelle A.T., Offit, Kenneth, Kogevinas, Manolis, Weiderpass, Elisabete, McCullough, Marjorie L., Freedman, Neal D., Albanes, Demetrius, Kooperberg, Charles, Cortessis, Victoria K., Karagas, Margaret R., Johnson, Alison, Schwenn, Molly R., Baris, Dalsu, Furberg, Helena, Bajorin, Dean F., Cussenot, Olivier, Cancel-Tassin, Geraldine, Benhamou, Simone, Kraft, Peter, Porru, Stefano, Carta, Angela, Bishop, Timothy, Southey, Melissa C., Matullo, Giuseppe, Fletcher, Tony, Kumar, Rajiv, Taylor, Jack A., Lamy, Philippe, Prip, Frederik, Kalisz, Mark, Weinstein, Stephanie J., Hengstler, Jan G., Selinski, Silvia, Harland, Mark, Teo, Mark, Kiltie, Anne E., Tardón, Adonina, Serra, Consol, Carrato, Alfredo, García-Closas, Reina, Lloreta, Josep, Schned, Alan, Lenz, Petra, Riboli, Elio, Brennan, Paul, Tjønneland, Anne, Otto, Thomas, Ovsiannikov, Daniel, Volkert, Frank, Vermeulen, Sita H., Aben, Katja K., Galesloot, Tessel E., Turman, Constance, De Vivo, Immaculata, Giovannucci, Edward, Hunter, David J., Hohensee, Chancellor, Hunt, Rebecca, Patel, Alpa V., Huang, Wen-Yi, Thorleifsson, Gudmar, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Amiano, Pilar, Golka, Klaus, Stern, Mariana C., Yan, Wusheng, Liu, Jia, Li, Shengchao Alfred, Katta, Shilpa, Hutchinson, Amy, Hicks, Belynda, Wheeler, William A., Purdue, Mark P., McGlynn, Katherine A., Kitahara, Cari M., Haiman, Christopher A., Greene, Mark H., Rafnar, Thorunn, Chatterjee, Nilanjan, Chanock, Stephen J., Wu, Xifeng, Real, Francisco X., Silverman, Debra T., Garcia-Closas, Montserrat, Stefansson, Kari, Prokunina-Olsson, Ludmila, Malats, Núria, and Rothman, Nathaniel

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

39. Polygenic risk scores and breast and epithelial ovarian cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants

Author

Barnes, Daniel R, Rookus, Matti A, McGuffog, Lesley, Leslie, Goska, Mooij, Thea M, Dennis, Joe, Mavaddat, Nasim, Adlard, Julian, Ahmed, Munaza, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrieu, Nadine, Andrulis, Irene L, Arnold, Norbert, Arun, Banu K, Azzollini, Jacopo, Balmaña, Judith, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Barrowdale, Daniel, Benitez, Javier, Berthet, Pascaline, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Blanco, Amie M, Blok, Marinus J, Bonanni, Bernardo, Boonen, Susanne E, Borg, Åke, Bozsik, Aniko, Bradbury, Angela R, Brennan, Paul, Brewer, Carole, Brunet, Joan, Buys, Saundra S, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Christensen, Lise Lotte, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Colas, Chrystelle, Collonge-Rame, Marie-Agnès, Cook, Jackie, Daly, Mary B, Davidson, Rosemarie, de la Hoya, Miguel, de Putter, Robin, Delnatte, Capucine, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Ding, Yuan Chun, Domchek, Susan M, Dorfling, Cecilia M, Dumont, Martine, Eeles, Ros, Ejlertsen, Bent, Engel, Christoph, Evans, D Gareth, Faivre, Laurence, Foretova, Lenka, Fostira, Florentia, Friedlander, Michael, Friedman, Eitan, Frost, Debra, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Gehrig, Andrea, Gerdes, Anne-Marie, Gesta, Paul, Giraud, Sophie, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldgar, David E, González-Neira, Anna, Greene, Mark H, Gschwantler-Kaulich, Daphne, Hahnen, Eric, Hamann, Ute, Hanson, Helen, Hentschel, Julia, Hogervorst, Frans BL, Hooning, Maartje J, Horvath, Judit, Hu, Chunling, Hulick, Peter J, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Izatt, Louise, Izquierdo, Angel, Jakubowska, Anna, James, Paul A, Janavicius, Ramunas, John, Esther M, Joseph, Vijai, Karlan, Beth Y, Kast, Karin, Koudijs, Marco, Kruse, Torben A, Kwong, Ava, Laitman, Yael, Lasset, Christine, and Lazaro, Conxi

Subjects
Clinical Research, Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Prevention, Rare Diseases, Breast Cancer, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, Aetiology, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Breast Neoplasms, Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial, Female, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Heterozygote, Humans, Mutation, Ovarian Neoplasms, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, BRCA1, 2, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, PRS, genetics, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, kConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, GENEPSO Investigators, Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA and BRCA2, BRCA1/2, Genetics, Clinical Sciences, Genetics & Heredity
Abstract

PurposeWe assessed the associations between population-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.MethodsRetrospective cohort data on 18,935 BRCA1 and 12,339 BRCA2 female pathogenic variant carriers of European ancestry were available. Three versions of a 313 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) BC PRS were evaluated based on whether they predict overall, estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, or ER-positive BC, and two PRS for overall or high-grade serous EOC. Associations were validated in a prospective cohort.ResultsThe ER-negative PRS showed the strongest association with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation = 1.29 [95% CI 1.25-1.33], P = 3×10-72). For BRCA2, the strongest association was with overall BC PRS (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.27-1.36], P = 7×10-50). HR estimates decreased significantly with age and there was evidence for differences in associations by predicted variant effects on protein expression. The HR estimates were smaller than general population estimates. The high-grade serous PRS yielded the strongest associations with EOC risk for BRCA1 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI 1.25-1.40], P = 3×10-22) and BRCA2 (HR = 1.44 [95% CI 1.30-1.60], P = 4×10-12) carriers. The associations in the prospective cohort were similar.ConclusionPopulation-based PRS are strongly associated with BC and EOC risks for BRCA1/2 carriers and predict substantial absolute risk differences for women at PRS distribution extremes.

Published
2020

40. Assessment of polygenic architecture and risk prediction based on common variants across fourteen cancers.

Author

Zhang, Yan Dora, Hurson, Amber N, Zhang, Haoyu, Choudhury, Parichoy Pal, Easton, Douglas F, Milne, Roger L, Simard, Jacques, Hall, Per, Michailidou, Kyriaki, Dennis, Joe, Schmidt, Marjanka K, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Gharahkhani, Puya, Whiteman, David, Campbell, Peter T, Hoffmeister, Michael, Jenkins, Mark, Peters, Ulrike, Hsu, Li, Gruber, Stephen B, Casey, Graham, Schmit, Stephanie L, O'Mara, Tracy A, Spurdle, Amanda B, Thompson, Deborah J, Tomlinson, Ian, De Vivo, Immaculata, Landi, Maria Teresa, Law, Matthew H, Iles, Mark M, Demenais, Florence, Kumar, Rajiv, MacGregor, Stuart, Bishop, D Timothy, Ward, Sarah V, Bondy, Melissa L, Houlston, Richard, Wiencke, John K, Melin, Beatrice, Barnholtz-Sloan, Jill, Kinnersley, Ben, Wrensch, Margaret R, Amos, Christopher I, Hung, Rayjean J, Brennan, Paul, McKay, James, Caporaso, Neil E, Berndt, Sonja I, Birmann, Brenda M, Camp, Nicola J, Kraft, Peter, Rothman, Nathaniel, Slager, Susan L, Berchuck, Andrew, Pharoah, Paul DP, Sellers, Thomas A, Gayther, Simon A, Pearce, Celeste L, Goode, Ellen L, Schildkraut, Joellen M, Moysich, Kirsten B, Amundadottir, Laufey T, Jacobs, Eric J, Klein, Alison P, Petersen, Gloria M, Risch, Harvey A, Stolzenberg-Solomon, Rachel Z, Wolpin, Brian M, Li, Donghui, Eeles, Rosalind A, Haiman, Christopher A, Kote-Jarai, Zsofia, Schumacher, Fredrick R, Al Olama, Ali Amin, Purdue, Mark P, Scelo, Ghislaine, Dalgaard, Marlene D, Greene, Mark H, Grotmol, Tom, Kanetsky, Peter A, McGlynn, Katherine A, Nathanson, Katherine L, Turnbull, Clare, Wiklund, Fredrik, Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC), Barrett’s and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON), Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR), Transdisciplinary Studies of Genetic Variation in Colorectal Cancer (CORECT), Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium (ECAC), Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO), Melanoma Genetics Consortium (GenoMEL), Glioma International Case-Control Study (GICC), International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO), Integrative Analysis of Lung Cancer Etiology and Risk (INTEGRAL) Consortium, International Consortium of Investigators Working on Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Epidemiologic Studies (InterLymph), Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC), Oral Cancer GWAS, Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4), Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium (PanScan), and Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer Associated Alterations in the Genome (PRACTICAL)

Subjects
Breast Cancer Association Consortium, Barrett’s and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium, Colon Cancer Family Registry, Transdisciplinary Studies of Genetic Variation in Colorectal Cancer, Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium, Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium, Melanoma Genetics Consortium, Glioma International Case-Control Study, International Lung Cancer Consortium, Integrative Analysis of Lung Cancer Etiology and Risk (INTEGRAL) Consortium, International Consortium of Investigators Working on Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Epidemiologic Studies, Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium, Oral Cancer GWAS, Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium, Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium, Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer Associated Alterations in the Genome, Renal Cancer GWAS, Testicular Cancer Consortium, Animals, Humans, Neoplasms, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Incidence, Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Multifactorial Inheritance, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Models, Genetic, Female, Male, Genome-Wide Association Study, Human Genome, Prevention, Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Genetics, Urologic Diseases, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors
Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have led to the identification of hundreds of susceptibility loci across cancers, but the impact of further studies remains uncertain. Here we analyse summary-level data from GWAS of European ancestry across fourteen cancer sites to estimate the number of common susceptibility variants (polygenicity) and underlying effect-size distribution. All cancers show a high degree of polygenicity, involving at a minimum of thousands of loci. We project that sample sizes required to explain 80% of GWAS heritability vary from 60,000 cases for testicular to over 1,000,000 cases for lung cancer. The maximum relative risk achievable for subjects at the 99th risk percentile of underlying polygenic risk scores (PRS), compared to average risk, ranges from 12 for testicular to 2.5 for ovarian cancer. We show that PRS have potential for risk stratification for cancers of breast, colon and prostate, but less so for others because of modest heritability and lower incidence.

Published
2020

41. Transcriptome‐wide association study of breast cancer risk by estrogen‐receptor status

Author

Feng, Helian, Gusev, Alexander, Pasaniuc, Bogdan, Wu, Lang, Long, Jirong, Abu‐full, Zomoroda, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton‐Culver, Hoda, Antoniou, Antonis C, Arason, Adalgeir, Arndt, Volker, Aronson, Kristan J, Arun, Banu K, Asseryanis, Ella, Auer, Paul L, Azzollini, Jacopo, Balmaña, Judith, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Barnes, Daniel R, Barrowdale, Daniel, Beckmann, Matthias W, Behrens, Sabine, Benitez, Javier, Bermisheva, Marina, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Blanco, Ana, Blomqvist, Carl, Boeckx, Bram, Bogdanova, Natalia V, Bojesen, Stig E, Bolla, Manjeet K, Bonanni, Bernardo, Borg, Ake, Brauch, Hiltrud, Brenner, Hermann, Briceno, Ignacio, Broeks, Annegien, Brüning, Thomas, Burwinkel, Barbara, Cai, Qiuyin, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Canisius, Sander, Campa, Daniele, Carter, Brian D, Carter, Jonathan, Castelao, Jose E, Chang‐Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Christiansen, Hans, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Clarke, Christine L, Collaborators, GEMO Study, Collaborators, EMBRACE, Collaborators, GC‐HBOC study, Couch, Fergus J, Cox, Angela, Cross, Simon S, Cybulski, Cezary, Czene, Kamila, Daly, Mary B, de la Hoya, Miguel, De Leeneer, Kim, Dennis, Joe, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, dos‐Santos‐Silva, Isabel, Dunning, Alison M, Dwek, Miriam, Eccles, Diana M, Ejlertsen, Bent, Ellberg, Carolina, Engel, Christoph, Eriksson, Mikael, Fasching, Peter A, Fletcher, Olivia, Flyger, Henrik, Fostira, Florentia, Friedman, Eitan, Fritschi, Lin, Frost, Debra, Gabrielson, Marike, Ganz, Patricia A, Gapstur, Susan M, Garber, Judy, García‐Closas, Montserrat, García‐Sáenz, José A, Gaudet, Mia M, Giles, Graham G, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldberg, Mark S, Goldgar, David E, González‐Neira, Anna, and Greene, Mark H

Subjects
Biological Sciences, Health Sciences, Genetics, Cancer, Biotechnology, Prevention, Clinical Research, Human Genome, Estrogen, Breast Cancer, Aetiology, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, Breast Neoplasms, Estrogens, Female, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Genome-Wide Association Study, Genomics, Humans, Receptors, Estrogen, Risk Assessment, Transcriptome, Vesicular Transport Proteins, breast cancer subtype, causal gene, GWAS, TWAS, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, GC-HBOC study Collaborators, ABCTB Investigators, HEBON Investigators, BCFR Investigators, OCGN Investigators, Public Health and Health Services, Epidemiology
Abstract

Previous transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype-specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta-analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER-). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER- subtypes, using a case-only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER- breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS-significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast-cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS-significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER- breast cancer.

Published
2020

42. Genome-wide association study identifies 32 novel breast cancer susceptibility loci from overall and subtype-specific analyses.

Author

Zhang, Haoyu, Ahearn, Thomas U, Lecarpentier, Julie, Barnes, Daniel, Beesley, Jonathan, Qi, Guanghao, Jiang, Xia, O'Mara, Tracy A, Zhao, Ni, Bolla, Manjeet K, Dunning, Alison M, Dennis, Joe, Wang, Qin, Ful, Zumuruda Abu, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Arndt, Volker, Aronson, Kristan J, Arun, Banu K, Auer, Paul L, Azzollini, Jacopo, Barrowdale, Daniel, Becher, Heiko, Beckmann, Matthias W, Behrens, Sabine, Benitez, Javier, Bermisheva, Marina, Bialkowska, Katarzyna, Blanco, Ana, Blomqvist, Carl, Bogdanova, Natalia V, Bojesen, Stig E, Bonanni, Bernardo, Bondavalli, Davide, Borg, Ake, Brauch, Hiltrud, Brenner, Hermann, Briceno, Ignacio, Broeks, Annegien, Brucker, Sara Y, Brüning, Thomas, Burwinkel, Barbara, Buys, Saundra S, Byers, Helen, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Calvello, Mariarosaria, Campa, Daniele, Castelao, Jose E, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Christiaens, Melissa, Christiansen, Hans, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Clarke, Christine L, Cornelissen, Sten, Couch, Fergus J, Cox, Angela, Cross, Simon S, Czene, Kamila, Daly, Mary B, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, Dwek, Miriam, Eccles, Diana M, Ekici, Arif B, Evans, D Gareth, Fasching, Peter A, Figueroa, Jonine, Foretova, Lenka, Fostira, Florentia, Friedman, Eitan, Frost, Debra, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Gapstur, Susan M, Garber, Judy, García-Sáenz, José A, Gaudet, Mia M, Gayther, Simon A, Giles, Graham G, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldberg, Mark S, Goldgar, David E, González-Neira, Anna, Greene, Mark H, Gronwald, Jacek, Guénel, Pascal, Häberle, Lothar, Hahnen, Eric, Haiman, Christopher A, Hake, Christopher R, Hall, Per, Hamann, Ute, Harkness, Elaine F, Heemskerk-Gerritsen, Bernadette AM, and Hillemanns, Peter

Subjects
kConFab Investigators, ABCTB Investigators, EMBRACE Study, GEMO Study Collaborators, Humans, Breast Neoplasms, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, BRCA1 Protein, Case-Control Studies, Linkage Disequilibrium, Mutation, Female, Genome-Wide Association Study, Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms, Human Genome, Cancer, Prevention, Genetics, Breast Cancer, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, Developmental Biology, Biological Sciences, Medical and Health Sciences
Abstract

Breast cancer susceptibility variants frequently show heterogeneity in associations by tumor subtype1-3. To identify novel loci, we performed a genome-wide association study including 133,384 breast cancer cases and 113,789 controls, plus 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer) of European ancestry, using both standard and novel methodologies that account for underlying tumor heterogeneity by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and tumor grade. We identified 32 novel susceptibility loci (P

Published
2020

43. Prospective follow-up of quality of life for participants undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or ovarian cancer screening in GOG-0199: An NRG Oncology/GOG study

Author

Mai, Phuong L, Huang, Helen Q, Wenzel, Lari B, Han, Paul K, Moser, Richard P, Rodriguez, Gustavo C, Boggess, John, Rutherford, Thomas J, Cohn, David E, Kauff, Noah D, Phillips, Kelly-Anne, Wilkinson, Kelly, Wenham, Robert M, Hamilton, Chad, Powell, Matthew A, Walker, Joan L, Greene, Mark H, and Hensley, Martee L

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Ovarian Cancer, Depression, Behavioral and Social Science, Prevention, Rare Diseases, Clinical Research, Clinical Trials and Supportive Activities, Mental Health, Cancer, Patient Safety, Adult, Aged, Cohort Studies, Early Detection of Cancer, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Middle Aged, Ovarian Neoplasms, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Salpingo-oophorectomy, Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine, Oncology & Carcinogenesis, Clinical sciences, Oncology and carcinogenesis, Reproductive medicine
Abstract

BackgroundRisk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and ovarian cancer screening (OCS) are management options for women at increased risk of ovarian cancer. Long-term effects of these interventions on quality of life (QOL) are not well understood.MethodsGOG-0199 is a prospective cohort study of women at increased ovarian cancer risk who chose either RRSO or OCS as their risk management intervention. At study entry, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months of follow-up, participants completed the QOL questionnaire, which included the Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36, the Impact of Events Scales, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale, and the Sexual Activity Questionnaire. QOL measures were compared between the RRSO and OCS cohort at baseline and over time.ResultsFive-hundred-sixty-two participants in the RRSO cohort and 1,010 in the OCS completed the baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire. At baseline, participants selecting RRSO reported lower health-related QOL (HRQOL), greater ovarian cancer-related stress, greater anxiety, and more depressive symptomatology, which improved during follow-up, especially for ovarian cancer-related stress. Screening was not found to adversely impact HRQOL. Hormone-related menopausal symptoms worsened and sexual functioning declined during follow-up in both cohorts, but more so among participants who underwent RRSO.ConclusionsHRQOL improved after surgery among women who chose RRSO and remained stable among participants undergoing screening. The adverse effects of RRSO and screening on short-term and long-term sexual activity and sexual functioning warrant consideration in the decision-making process for high-risk women.

Published
2020

44. BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic sequence variants in women of African origin or ancestry

Author

Friebel, Tara M, Andrulis, Irene L, Balmaña, Judith, Blanco, Amie M, Couch, Fergus J, Daly, Mary B, Domchek, Susan M, Easton, Douglas F, Foulkes, William D, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Glendon, Gord, Greene, Mark H, Hulick, Peter J, Isaacs, Claudine, Jankowitz, Rachel C, Karlan, Beth Y, Kirk, Judy, Kwong, Ava, Lee, Annette, Lesueur, Fabienne, Lu, Karen H, Nathanson, Katherine L, Neuhausen, Susan L, Offit, Kenneth, Palmero, Edenir I, Sharma, Priyanka, Tischkowitz, Marc, Toland, Amanda E, Tung, Nadine, van Rensburg, Elizabeth J, Vega, Ana, Weitzel, Jeffrey N, Collaborators, GEMO Study, Hoskins, Kent F, Maga, Tara, Parsons, Michael T, McGuffog, Lesley, Antoniou, Antonis C, Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia, Huo, Dezheng, Olopade, Olufunmilayo I, and Rebbeck, Timothy R

Subjects
Biological Sciences, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Genetics, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Alleles, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Black People, Female, Genetic Association Studies, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Genetic Variation, Humans, Mutation, Population Surveillance, African ancestry, BRCA1, BRCA2, mutation, pathogenic sequence variant, Clinical Sciences, Genetics & Heredity, Clinical sciences
Abstract

BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) pathogenic sequence variants (PSVs) confer elevated risks of multiple cancers. However, most BRCA1/2 PSVs reports focus on European ancestry individuals. Knowledge of the PSV distribution in African descent individuals is poorly understood. We undertook a systematic review of the published literature and publicly available databases reporting BRCA1/2 PSVs also accessed the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) database to identify African or African descent individuals. Using these data, we inferred which of the BRCA PSVs were likely to be of African continental origin. Of the 43,817 BRCA1/2 PSV carriers in the CIMBA database, 469 (1%) were of African descent. Additional African descent individuals were identified in public databases (n = 291) and the literature (n = 601). We identified 164 unique BRCA1 and 173 unique BRCA2 PSVs in individuals of African ancestry. Of these, 83 BRCA1 and 91 BRCA2 PSVs are of likely or possible African origin. We observed numerous differences in the distribution of PSV type and function in African origin versus non-African origin PSVs. Research in populations of African ancestry with BRCA1/2 PSVs is needed to provide the information needed for clinical management and decision-making in African descent individuals worldwide.

Published
2019

45. Mendelian randomisation study of height and body mass index as modifiers of ovarian cancer risk in 22,588 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Author

Qian, Frank, Rookus, Matti A, Leslie, Goska, Risch, Harvey A, Greene, Mark H, Aalfs, Cora M, Adank, Muriel A, Adlard, Julian, Agnarsson, Bjarni A, Ahmed, Munaza, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Arnold, Norbert, Arun, Banu K, Ausems, Margreet GEM, Azzollini, Jacopo, Barrowdale, Daniel, Barwell, Julian, Benitez, Javier, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Bonadona, Valérie, Borde, Julika, Borg, Ake, Bradbury, Angela R, Brunet, Joan, Buys, Saundra S, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Carter, Jonathan, Chiquette, Jocelyne, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Collée, J Margriet, Collonge-Rame, Marie-Agnès, Couch, Fergus J, Daly, Mary B, Delnatte, Capucine, Diez, Orland, Domchek, Susan M, Dorfling, Cecilia M, Eason, Jacqueline, Easton, Douglas F, Eeles, Ros, Engel, Christoph, Evans, D Gareth, Faivre, Laurence, Feliubadaló, Lidia, Foretova, Lenka, Friedman, Eitan, Frost, Debra, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa, Gehrig, Andrea, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Gómez Garcia, Encarna B, Hamann, Ute, Hauke, Jan, Hopper, John L, Hulick, Peter J, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Izatt, Louise, Jakubowska, Anna, Janavicius, Ramunas, John, Esther M, Karlan, Beth Y, Kets, Carolien M, Laitman, Yael, Lázaro, Conxi, Leroux, Dominique, Lester, Jenny, Lesueur, Fabienne, Loud, Jennifer T, Lubiński, Jan, Łukomska, Alicja, McGuffog, Lesley, Mebirouk, Noura, Meijers-Heijboer, Hanne EJ, Meindl, Alfons, Miller, Austin, Montagna, Marco, Mooij, Thea M, Mouret-Fourme, Emmanuelle, Nathanson, Katherine L, Nehoray, Bita, Neuhausen, Susan L, Nevanlinna, Heli, Nielsen, Finn C, Offit, Kenneth, Olah, Edith, Ong, Kai-ren, Oosterwijk, Jan C, Ottini, Laura, Parsons, Michael T, Peterlongo, Paolo, Pfeiler, Georg, and Pradhan, Nisha

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Clinical Research, Prevention, Ovarian Cancer, Breast Cancer, Genetics, Aging, Cancer, Rare Diseases, Aetiology, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, Adult, Aged, Body Height, Body Mass Index, Female, Genes, BRCA1, Genes, BRCA2, Heterozygote, Humans, Mendelian Randomization Analysis, Menopause, Middle Aged, Mutation, Ovarian Neoplasms, Proportional Hazards Models, KConFab Investigators, HEBON Investigators, GEMO Study Collaborators, EMBRACE Collaborators, CIMBA, Public Health and Health Services, Oncology & Carcinogenesis, Oncology and carcinogenesis
Abstract

BackgroundHeight and body mass index (BMI) are associated with higher ovarian cancer risk in the general population, but whether such associations exist among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is unknown.MethodsWe applied a Mendelian randomisation approach to examine height/BMI with ovarian cancer risk using the Consortium of Investigators for the Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) data set, comprising 14,676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, with 2923 ovarian cancer cases. We created a height genetic score (height-GS) using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score (BMI-GS) using 93 BMI-associated variants. Associations were assessed using weighted Cox models.ResultsObserved height was not associated with ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07 per 10-cm increase in height, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.23). Height-GS showed similar results (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85-1.23). Higher BMI was significantly associated with increased risk in premenopausal women with HR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.06-1.48) and HR = 1.59 (95% CI: 1.08-2.33) per 5-kg/m2 increase in observed and genetically determined BMI, respectively. No association was found for postmenopausal women. Interaction between menopausal status and BMI was significant (Pinteraction

Published
2019

46. Genome-wide association and transcriptome studies identify target genes and risk loci for breast cancer.

Author

Ferreira, Manuel A, Gamazon, Eric R, Al-Ejeh, Fares, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Arason, Adalgeir, Arndt, Volker, Aronson, Kristan J, Arun, Banu K, Asseryanis, Ella, Azzollini, Jacopo, Balmaña, Judith, Barnes, Daniel R, Barrowdale, Daniel, Beckmann, Matthias W, Behrens, Sabine, Benitez, Javier, Bermisheva, Marina, Białkowska, Katarzyna, Blomqvist, Carl, Bogdanova, Natalia V, Bojesen, Stig E, Bolla, Manjeet K, Borg, Ake, Brauch, Hiltrud, Brenner, Hermann, Broeks, Annegien, Burwinkel, Barbara, Caldés, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campa, Daniele, Campbell, Ian, Canzian, Federico, Carter, Jonathan, Carter, Brian D, Castelao, Jose E, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Chanock, Stephen J, Christiansen, Hans, Chung, Wendy K, Claes, Kathleen BM, Clarke, Christine L, EMBRACE Collaborators, GC-HBOC Study Collaborators, GEMO Study Collaborators, Couch, Fergus J, Cox, Angela, Cross, Simon S, Czene, Kamila, Daly, Mary B, de la Hoya, Miguel, Dennis, Joe, Devilee, Peter, Diez, Orland, Dörk, Thilo, Dunning, Alison M, Dwek, Miriam, Eccles, Diana M, Ejlertsen, Bent, Ellberg, Carolina, Engel, Christoph, Eriksson, Mikael, Fasching, Peter A, Fletcher, Olivia, Flyger, Henrik, Friedman, Eitan, Frost, Debra, Gabrielson, Marike, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Ganz, Patricia A, Gapstur, Susan M, Garber, Judy, García-Closas, Montserrat, García-Sáenz, José A, Gaudet, Mia M, Giles, Graham G, Glendon, Gord, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldberg, Mark S, Goldgar, David E, González-Neira, Anna, Greene, Mark H, Gronwald, Jacek, Guénel, Pascal, Haiman, Christopher A, Hall, Per, Hamann, Ute, He, Wei, Heyworth, Jane, Hogervorst, Frans BL, Hollestelle, Antoinette, Hoover, Robert N, Hopper, John L, Hulick, Peter J, Humphreys, Keith, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, ABCTB Investigators, HEBON Investigators, and BCFR Investigators

Subjects
EMBRACE Collaborators, GC-HBOC Study Collaborators, GEMO Study Collaborators, ABCTB Investigators, HEBON Investigators, BCFR Investigators, Humans, Breast Neoplasms, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Gene Expression Profiling, Quantitative Trait Loci, Female, Genome-Wide Association Study, Prevention, Cancer, Human Genome, Aging, Breast Cancer, Genetics, Biotechnology, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors
Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 170 breast cancer susceptibility loci. Here we hypothesize that some risk-associated variants might act in non-breast tissues, specifically adipose tissue and immune cells from blood and spleen. Using expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) reported in these tissues, we identify 26 previously unreported, likely target genes of overall breast cancer risk variants, and 17 for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, several with a known immune function. We determine the directional effect of gene expression on disease risk measured based on single and multiple eQTL. In addition, using a gene-based test of association that considers eQTL from multiple tissues, we identify seven (and four) regions with variants associated with overall (and ER-negative) breast cancer risk, which were not reported in previous GWAS. Further investigation of the function of the implicated genes in breast and immune cells may provide insights into the etiology of breast cancer.

Published
2019

48. A Transcriptome-Wide Association Study Among 97,898 Women to Identify Candidate Susceptibility Genes for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Risk

Author

Lu, Yingchang, Beeghly-Fadiel, Alicia, Wu, Lang, Guo, Xingyi, Li, Bingshan, Schildkraut, Joellen M, Im, Hae Kyung, Chen, Yian A, Permuth, Jennifer B, Reid, Brett M, Teer, Jamie K, Moysich, Kirsten B, Andrulis, Irene L, Anton-Culver, Hoda, Arun, Banu K, Bandera, Elisa V, Barkardottir, Rosa B, Barnes, Daniel R, Benitez, Javier, Bjorge, Line, Brenton, James, Butzow, Ralf, Caldes, Trinidad, Caligo, Maria A, Campbell, Ian, Chang-Claude, Jenny, Claes, Kathleen BM, Couch, Fergus J, Cramer, Daniel W, Daly, Mary B, deFazio, Anna, Dennis, Joe, Diez, Orland, Domchek, Susan M, Dörk, Thilo, Easton, Douglas F, Eccles, Diana M, Fasching, Peter A, Fortner, Renée T, Fountzilas, George, Friedman, Eitan, Ganz, Patricia A, Garber, Judy, Giles, Graham G, Godwin, Andrew K, Goldgar, David E, Goodman, Marc T, Greene, Mark H, Gronwald, Jacek, Hamann, Ute, Heitz, Florian, Hildebrandt, Michelle AT, Høgdall, Claus K, Hollestelle, Antoinette, Hulick, Peter J, Huntsman, David G, Imyanitov, Evgeny N, Isaacs, Claudine, Jakubowska, Anna, James, Paul, Karlan, Beth Y, Kelemen, Linda E, Kiemeney, Lambertus A, Kjaer, Susanne K, Kwong, Ava, Le, Nhu D, Leslie, Goska, Lesueur, Fabienne, Levine, Douglas A, Mattiello, Amalia, May, Taymaa, McGuffog, Lesley, McNeish, Iain A, Merritt, Melissa A, Modugno, Francesmary, Montagna, Marco, Neuhausen, Susan L, Nevanlinna, Heli, Nielsen, Finn C, Nikitina-Zake, Liene, Nussbaum, Robert L, Offit, Kenneth, Olah, Edith, Olopade, Olufunmilayo I, Olson, Sara H, Olsson, Håkan, Osorio, Ana, Park, Sue K, Parsons, Michael T, Peeters, Petra HM, Pejovic, Tanja, Peterlongo, Paolo, Phelan, Catherine M, Pujana, Miquel Angel, Ramus, Susan J, Rennert, Gad, Risch, Harvey, Rodriguez, Gustavo C, Rodríguez-Antona, Cristina, and Romieu, Isabelle

Subjects
Biological Sciences, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Genetics, Prevention, Human Genome, Ovarian Cancer, Rare Diseases, Cancer, 2.1 Biological and endogenous factors, Aetiology, Carcinogenesis, Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial, Cohort Studies, Female, Gene Expression Profiling, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Genome-Wide Association Study, Genotype, Humans, Ovarian Neoplasms, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Prognosis, Quantitative Trait Loci, Risk Factors, Transcriptome, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Oncology & Carcinogenesis, Biochemistry and cell biology, Oncology and carcinogenesis
Abstract

Large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified approximately 35 loci associated with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk. The majority of GWAS-identified disease susceptibility variants are located in noncoding regions, and causal genes underlying these associations remain largely unknown. Here, we performed a transcriptome-wide association study to search for novel genetic loci and plausible causal genes at known GWAS loci. We used RNA sequencing data (68 normal ovarian tissue samples from 68 individuals and 6,124 cross-tissue samples from 369 individuals) and high-density genotyping data from European descendants of the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx V6) project to build ovarian and cross-tissue models of genetically regulated expression using elastic net methods. We evaluated 17,121 genes for their cis-predicted gene expression in relation to EOC risk using summary statistics data from GWAS of 97,898 women, including 29,396 EOC cases. With a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of P < 2.2 × 10-6, we identified 35 genes, including FZD4 at 11q14.2 (Z = 5.08, P = 3.83 × 10-7, the cross-tissue model; 1 Mb away from any GWAS-identified EOC risk variant), a potential novel locus for EOC risk. All other 34 significantly associated genes were located within 1 Mb of known GWAS-identified loci, including 23 genes at 6 loci not previously linked to EOC risk. Upon conditioning on nearby known EOC GWAS-identified variants, the associations for 31 genes disappeared and three genes remained (P < 1.47 × 10-3). These data identify one novel locus (FZD4) and 34 genes at 13 known EOC risk loci associated with EOC risk, providing new insights into EOC carcinogenesis.Significance: Transcriptomic analysis of a large cohort confirms earlier GWAS loci and reveals FZD4 as a novel locus associated with EOC risk. Cancer Res; 78(18); 5419-30. ©2018 AACR.

Published
2018

49. Early Detection of Ovarian Cancer using the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm with Frequent CA125 Testing in Women at Increased Familial Risk – Combined Results from Two Screening Trials

Author

Skates, Steven J, Greene, Mark H, Buys, Saundra S, Mai, Phuong L, Brown, Powel, Piedmonte, Marion, Rodriguez, Gustavo, Schorge, John O, Sherman, Mark, Daly, Mary B, Rutherford, Thomas, Brewster, Wendy R, O'Malley, David M, Partridge, Edward, Boggess, John, Drescher, Charles W, Isaacs, Claudine, Berchuck, Andrew, Domchek, Susan, Davidson, Susan A, Edwards, Robert, Elg, Steven A, Wakeley, Katie, Phillips, Kelly-Anne, Armstrong, Deborah, Horowitz, Ira, Fabian, Carol J, Walker, Joan, Sluss, Patrick M, Welch, William, Minasian, Lori, Horick, Nora K, Kasten, Carol H, Nayfield, Susan, Alberts, David, Finkelstein, Dianne M, and Lu, Karen H

Subjects
Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Prevention, Genetic Testing, Rare Diseases, Clinical Research, Genetics, Detection, screening and diagnosis, 4.4 Population screening, Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Breast Neoplasms, CA-125 Antigen, Early Detection of Cancer, Female, Humans, Membrane Proteins, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Ovarian Neoplasms, Risk Factors, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Oncology & Carcinogenesis
Abstract

Purpose: Women at familial/genetic ovarian cancer risk often undergo screening despite unproven efficacy. Research suggests each woman has her own CA125 baseline; significant increases above this level may identify cancers earlier than standard 6- to 12-monthly CA125 > 35 U/mL.Experimental Design: Data from prospective Cancer Genetics Network and Gynecologic Oncology Group trials, which screened 3,692 women (13,080 woman-screening years) with a strong breast/ovarian cancer family history or BRCA1/2 mutations, were combined to assess a novel screening strategy. Specifically, serum CA125 q3 months, evaluated using a risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA), detected significant increases above each subject's baseline, which triggered transvaginal ultrasound. Specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were compared with levels derived from general population screening (specificity 90%, PPV 10%), and stage-at-detection was compared with historical high-risk controls.Results: Specificity for ultrasound referral was 92% versus 90% (P = 0.0001), and PPV was 4.6% versus 10% (P > 0.10). Eighteen of 19 malignant ovarian neoplasms [prevalent = 4, incident = 6, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) = 9] were detected via screening or RRSO. Among incident cases (which best reflect long-term screening performance), three of six invasive cancers were early-stage (I/II; 50% vs. 10% historical BRCA1 controls; P = 0.016). Six of nine RRSO-related cases were stage I. ROCA flagged three of six (50%) incident cases before CA125 exceeded 35 U/mL. Eight of nine patients with stages 0/I/II ovarian cancer were alive at last follow-up (median 6 years).Conclusions: For screened women at familial/genetic ovarian cancer risk, ROCA q3 months had better early-stage sensitivity at high specificity, and low yet possibly acceptable PPV compared with CA125 > 35 U/mL q6/q12 months, warranting further larger cohort evaluation. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3628-37. ©2017 AACR.

Published
2017

50. Factors associated with deciding between risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and ovarian cancer screening among high-risk women enrolled in GOG-0199: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study

Author

L, Phuong, Piedmonte, Marion, Han, Paul K, Moser, Richard P, Walker, Joan L, Rodriguez, Gustavo, Boggess, John, Rutherford, Thomas J, Zivanovic, Oliver, Cohn, David E, Thigpen, J Tate, Wenham, Robert M, Friedlander, Michael L, Hamilton, Chad A, Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie, Olawaiye, Alexander B, Hensley, Martee L, Greene, Mark H, Huang, Helen Q, and Wenzel, Lari

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Cancer, Clinical Trials and Supportive Activities, Clinical Research, Ovarian Cancer, Behavioral and Social Science, Women's Health, Prevention, Aging, Rare Diseases, Genetic Testing, Genetics, Good Health and Well Being, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Choice Behavior, Cohort Studies, Early Detection of Cancer, Educational Status, Female, Genes, BRCA1, Genes, BRCA2, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Humans, Middle Aged, Multivariate Analysis, Mutation, Ovarian Neoplasms, Ovariectomy, Perception, Prophylactic Surgical Procedures, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Risk, Risk Reduction Behavior, Salpingectomy, Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine, Oncology & Carcinogenesis, Clinical sciences, Oncology and carcinogenesis, Reproductive medicine
Abstract

ObjectivesWomen at increased genetic risk of ovarian cancer (OC) are recommended to have risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) after completion of reproductive planning. Effective screening has not been established, and novel screening modalities are being evaluated.MethodsParticipants chose either RRSO or a novel OC screening regimen (OCS) as their risk management option, and provided demographic and other data on BRCA mutation status, cancer worry, perceived intervention risks/benefits, perceived cancer risk, and quality-of-life at enrollment. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate factors influencing decision between RRSO and OCS.ResultsOf 2287 participants enrolled, 904 (40%) chose RRSO and 1383 (60%) chose OCS. Compared with participants choosing OCS, participants choosing RRSO were older (p50%, both higher than objective risk estimates.ConclusionsCancer worry, BRCA1/2 mutation status, and perceived intervention-related risks and benefits were associated with choosing between RRSO and OCS. Efforts to promote individualized, evidence-based, shared medical decision-making among high-risk women facing management choices should focus on conveying accurate OC risk estimates, clarifying the current understanding of intervention-related benefits and limitations, and addressing OC worry.

Published
2017

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results