Melbourne School of Population and Global Health - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4
-
ItemEvaluation of variation in the phosphoinositide-3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha oncogene and breast cancer risk(NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, 2011-12-06)BACKGROUND: Somatic mutations in phosphoinositide-3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) are frequent in breast tumours and have been associated with oestrogen receptor (ER) expression, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 overexpression, lymph node metastasis and poor survival. The goal of this study was to evaluate the association between inherited variation in this oncogene and risk of breast cancer. METHODS: A single-nucleotide polymorphism from the PIK3CA locus that was associated with breast cancer in a study of Caucasian breast cancer cases and controls from the Mayo Clinic (MCBCS) was genotyped in 5436 cases and 5280 controls from the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) study and in 30 949 cases and 29 788 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). RESULTS: Rs1607237 was significantly associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer in MCBCS, CGEMS and all studies of white Europeans combined (odds ratio (OR)=0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95-0.99, P=4.6 × 10(-3)), but did not reach significance in the BCAC replication study alone (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.01, P=0.139). CONCLUSION: Common germline variation in PIK3CA does not have a strong influence on the risk of breast cancer.
-
ItemIncreased cancer risks for relatives of very early-onset breast cancer cases with and without BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations(NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, 2010-09-28)BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding cancer risks for relatives of women with very early-onset breast cancer. METHODS: We studied 2208 parents and siblings of 504 unselected population-based Caucasian women with breast cancer diagnosed before age 35 years (103 from USA, 124 from Canada and 277 from Australia), 41 known to carry a mutation (24 in BRCA1, 16 in BRCA2 and one in both genes). Cancer-specific standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) were estimated by comparing the number of affected relatives (50% verified overall) with that expected based on incidences specific for country, sex, age and year of birth. RESULTS: For relatives of carriers, the female breast cancer SIRs were 13.13 (95% CI 6.57-26.26) and 12.52 (5.21-30.07) for BRCA1 and BRCA2, respectively. The ovarian cancer SIR was 12.38 (3.1-49.51) for BRCA1 and the prostate cancer SIR was 18.55 (4.64-74.17) for BRCA2. For relatives of non-carriers, the SIRs for female breast, prostate, lung, brain and urinary cancers were 4.03 (2.91-5.93), 5.25 (2.50-11.01), 7.73 (4.74-12.62), 5.19 (2.33-11.54) and 4.35 (1.81-10.46), respectively. For non-carriers, the SIRs remained elevated and were statistically significant for breast and prostate cancer when based on verified cancers. CONCLUSION: First-degree relatives of women with very early-onset breast cancer are at increased risk of cancers not explained by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.
-
ItemAssessing interactions between the associations of common genetic susceptibility variants, reproductive history and body mass index with breast cancer risk in the breast cancer association consortium: a combined case-control study(BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 2010)INTRODUCTION: Several common breast cancer genetic susceptibility variants have recently been identified. We aimed to determine how these variants combine with a subset of other known risk factors to influence breast cancer risk in white women of European ancestry using case-control studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. METHODS: We evaluated two-way interactions between each of age at menarche, ever having had a live birth, number of live births, age at first birth and body mass index (BMI) and each of 12 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (10q26-rs2981582 (FGFR2), 8q24-rs13281615, 11p15-rs3817198 (LSP1), 5q11-rs889312 (MAP3K1), 16q12-rs3803662 (TOX3), 2q35-rs13387042, 5p12-rs10941679 (MRPS30), 17q23-rs6504950 (COX11), 3p24-rs4973768 (SLC4A7), CASP8-rs17468277, TGFB1-rs1982073 and ESR1-rs3020314). Interactions were tested for by fitting logistic regression models including per-allele and linear trend main effects for SNPs and risk factors, respectively, and single-parameter interaction terms for linear departure from independent multiplicative effects. RESULTS: These analyses were applied to data for up to 26,349 invasive breast cancer cases and up to 32,208 controls from 21 case-control studies. No statistical evidence of interaction was observed beyond that expected by chance. Analyses were repeated using data from 11 population-based studies, and results were very similar. CONCLUSIONS: The relative risks for breast cancer associated with the common susceptibility variants identified to date do not appear to vary across women with different reproductive histories or body mass index (BMI). The assumption of multiplicative combined effects for these established genetic and other risk factors in risk prediction models appears justified.
-
ItemCYP17 genetic polymorphism, breast cancer, and breast cancer risk factors:: Australian Breast Cancer Family Study(BMC, 2005)INTRODUCTION: Because CYP17 can influence the degree of exposure of breast tissues to oestrogen, the interaction between polymorphisms in this gene and hormonal risk factors is of particular interest. We attempted to replicate the findings of studies assessing such interactions with the -34T-->C polymorphism. METHODS: Risk factor and CYP17 genotyping data were derived from a large Australian population-based case-control-family study of 1,284 breast cancer cases and 679 controls. Crude and adjusted odds ratio (OR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by unconditional logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: We found no associations between the CYP17 genotype and breast cancer overall. Premenopausal controls with A2/A2 genotype had a later age at menarche (P < 0.01). The only associations near statistical significance were that postmenopausal women with A1/A1 (wild-type) genotype had an increased risk of breast cancer if they had ever used hormone replacement therapy (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.0 to 5.7; P = 0.05) and if they had menopause after age 47 years (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.0 to 7.0; P = 0.06). We found no associations in common with any other studies, and no evidence for interactions. CONCLUSION: We observed no evidence of effect modification of reproductive risk factors by CYP17 genotype, although the experiment did not have sufficient statistical power to detect small main effects and modest effects in subgroups. Associations found only in subgroup analyses based on relatively small numbers require cautious interpretation without confirmation by other studies. This emphasizes the need for replication in multiple and large population-based studies to provide convincing evidence for gene-environment interactions.