Back to Search Start Over

Assessment of Multifactor Gene-Environment Interactions and Ovarian Cancer Risk: Candidate Genes, Obesity, and Hormone-Related Risk Factors

Authors :
Melissa C. Larson
Jonathan Tyrer
Estrid Høgdall
Malcolm C. Pike
Julie M. Cunningham
Penelope M. Webb
Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj
Allan Jensen
Jenny Chang-Claude
Louise A. Brinton
David Van Den Berg
Anja Rudolph
Joellen M. Schildkraut
Marc T. Goodman
Paul D.P. Pharoah
Joseph Usset
Lambertus A. Kiemeney
Ellen L. Goode
Sharon E. Johnatty
Hannah P. Yang
Francesmary Modugno
Joseph H. Rothstein
Susan J. Ramus
Alice S. Whittemore
Simon A. Gayther
Robert A. Vierkant
Valerie McGuire
Usha Menon
Pamela J. Thompson
Brooke L. Fridley
Mary Anne Rossing
Hoda Anton-Culver
Anna deFazio
Leon F.A.G. Massuger
Honglin Song
Shan Wang-Gohrke
Andrew Berchuck
Roberta B. Ness
Robert P. Edwards
Nicolas Wentzensen
Jennifer A. Doherty
Galina Lurie
Weiva Sieh
Rama Raghavan
Celeste Leigh Pearce
Anna H. Wu
Kirsten B. Moysich
Susanne K. Kjaer
Lynne R. Wilkens
Source :
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 25, 780-90, ResearcherID, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 25, 5, pp. 780-90
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Background: Many epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk factors relate to hormone exposure and elevated estrogen levels are associated with obesity in postmenopausal women. Therefore, we hypothesized that gene–environment interactions related to hormone-related risk factors could differ between obese and non-obese women. Methods: We considered interactions between 11,441 SNPs within 80 candidate genes related to hormone biosynthesis and metabolism and insulin-like growth factors with six hormone-related factors (oral contraceptive use, parity, endometriosis, tubal ligation, hormone replacement therapy, and estrogen use) and assessed whether these interactions differed between obese and non-obese women. Interactions were assessed using logistic regression models and data from 14 case–control studies (6,247 cases; 10,379 controls). Histotype-specific analyses were also completed. Results: SNPs in the following candidate genes showed notable interaction: IGF1R (rs41497346, estrogen plus progesterone hormone therapy, histology = all, P = 4.9 × 10−6) and ESR1 (rs12661437, endometriosis, histology = all, P = 1.5 × 10−5). The most notable obesity–gene–hormone risk factor interaction was within INSR (rs113759408, parity, histology = endometrioid, P = 8.8 × 10−6). Conclusions: We have demonstrated the feasibility of assessing multifactor interactions in large genetic epidemiology studies. Follow-up studies are necessary to assess the robustness of our findings for ESR1, CYP11A1, IGF1R, CYP11B1, INSR, and IGFBP2. Future work is needed to develop powerful statistical methods able to detect these complex interactions. Impact: Assessment of multifactor interaction is feasible, and, here, suggests that the relationship between genetic variants within candidate genes and hormone-related risk factors may vary EOC susceptibility. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(5); 780–90. ©2016 AACR.

Details

ISSN :
10559965
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 25, 780-90, ResearcherID, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 25, 5, pp. 780-90
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....e21b95ab232a5b86af441f02b202dd76