Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 32
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Weight is More Informative than Body Mass Index for Predicting Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Risk: Prospective Family Study Cohort (ProF-SC)
    Ye, Z ; Li, S ; Dite, GS ; Nguyen, TL ; MacInnis, RJ ; Andrulis, IL ; Buys, SS ; Daly, MB ; John, EM ; Kurian, AW ; Genkinger, JM ; Chung, WK ; Phillips, K-A ; Thorne, H ; Winship, IM ; Milne, RL ; Dugue, P-A ; Southey, MC ; Giles, GG ; Terry, MB ; Hopper, JL (AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH, 2022-03)
    UNLABELLED: We considered whether weight is more informative than body mass index (BMI) = weight/height2 when predicting breast cancer risk for postmenopausal women, and if the weight association differs by underlying familial risk. We studied 6,761 women postmenopausal at baseline with a wide range of familial risk from 2,364 families in the Prospective Family Study Cohort. Participants were followed for on average 11.45 years and there were 416 incident breast cancers. We used Cox regression to estimate risk associations with log-transformed weight and BMI after adjusting for underlying familial risk. We compared model fits using the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and nested models using the likelihood ratio test. The AIC for the weight-only model was 6.22 units lower than for the BMI-only model, and the log risk gradient was 23% greater. Adding BMI or height to weight did not improve fit (ΔAIC = 0.90 and 0.83, respectively; both P = 0.3). Conversely, adding weight to BMI or height gave better fits (ΔAIC = 5.32 and 11.64; P = 0.007 and 0.0002, respectively). Adding height improved only the BMI model (ΔAIC = 5.47; P = 0.006). There was no evidence that the BMI or weight associations differed by underlying familial risk (P > 0.2). Weight is more informative than BMI for predicting breast cancer risk, consistent with nonadipose as well as adipose tissue being etiologically relevant. The independent but multiplicative associations of weight and familial risk suggest that, in terms of absolute breast cancer risk, the association with weight is more important the greater a woman's underlying familial risk. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Our results suggest that the relationship between BMI and breast cancer could be due to a relationship between weight and breast cancer, downgraded by inappropriately adjusting for height; potential importance of anthropometric measures other than total body fat; breast cancer risk associations with BMI and weight are across a continuum.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Recreational Physical Activity and Outcomes After Breast Cancer in Women at High Familial Risk
    Kehm, RD ; MacInnis, RJ ; John, EM ; Liao, Y ; Kurian, AW ; Genkinger, JM ; Knight, JA ; Colonna, S ; Chung, WK ; Milne, R ; Zeinomar, N ; Dite, GS ; Southey, MC ; Giles, GG ; Mclachlan, S-A ; Whitaker, KD ; Friedlander, ML ; Weideman, PC ; Glendon, G ; Nesci, S ; Investigators, K ; Phillips, K-A ; Andrulis, IL ; Buys, SS ; Daly, MB ; Hopper, JL ; Terry, MB (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2021-12)
    BACKGROUND: Recreational physical activity (RPA) is associated with improved survival after breast cancer (BC) in average-risk women, but evidence is limited for women who are at increased familial risk because of a BC family history or BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants (BRCA1/2 PVs). METHODS: We estimated associations of RPA (self-reported average hours per week within 3 years of BC diagnosis) with all-cause mortality and second BC events (recurrence or new primary) after first invasive BC in women in the Prospective Family Study Cohort (n = 4610, diagnosed 1993-2011, aged 22-79 years at diagnosis). We fitted Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age at diagnosis, demographics, and lifestyle factors. We tested for multiplicative interactions (Wald test statistic for cross-product terms) and additive interactions (relative excess risk due to interaction) by age at diagnosis, body mass index, estrogen receptor status, stage at diagnosis, BRCA1/2 PVs, and familial risk score estimated from multigenerational pedigree data. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: We observed 1212 deaths and 473 second BC events over a median follow-up from study enrollment of 11.0 and 10.5 years, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, RPA (any vs none) was associated with lower all-cause mortality of 16.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.4% to 27.9%) overall, 11.8% (95% CI = -3.6% to 24.9%) in women without BRCA1/2 PVs, and 47.5% (95% CI = 17.4% to 66.6%) in women with BRCA1/2 PVs (RPA*BRCA1/2 multiplicative interaction P = .005; relative excess risk due to interaction = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.01 to 1.74). RPA was not associated with risk of second BC events. CONCLUSION: Findings support that RPA is associated with lower all-cause mortality in women with BC, particularly in women with BRCA1/2 PVs.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Oral Contraceptive Use in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: Absolute Cancer Risks and Benefits
    Schrijver, LH ; Mooij, TM ; Pijpe, A ; Sonke, GS ; Mourits, MJE ; Andrieu, N ; Antoniou, AC ; Easton, DF ; Engel, C ; Goldgar, D ; John, EM ; Kast, K ; Milne, RL ; Olsson, H ; Phillips, K-A ; Terry, MB ; Hopper, JL ; van Leeuwen, FE ; Rookus, MA (OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC, 2022-04-11)
    BACKGROUND: To help BRCA1 and 2 mutation carriers make informed decisions regarding use of combined-type oral contraceptive preparation (COCP), absolute risk-benefit estimates are needed for COCP-associated cancer. METHODS: For a hypothetical cohort of 10 000 women, we calculated the increased or decreased cumulative incidence of COCP-associated (breast, ovarian, endometrial) cancer, examining 18 scenarios with differences in duration and timing of COCP use, uptake of prophylactic surgeries, and menopausal hormone therapy. RESULTS: COCP use initially increased breast cancer risk and decreased ovarian and endometrial cancer risk long term. For 10 000 BRCA1 mutation carriers, 10 years of COCP use from age 20 to 30 years resulted in 66 additional COCP-associated cancer cases by the age of 35 years, in addition to 625 cases expected for never users. By the age of 70 years such COCP use resulted in 907 fewer cancer cases than the expected 9093 cases in never users. Triple-negative breast cancer estimates resulted in 196 additional COCP-associated cases by age 40 years, in addition to the 1454 expected. For 10 000 BRCA2 mutation carriers using COCP from age 20 to 30 years, 80 excess cancer cases were estimated by age 40 years in addition to 651 expected cases; by the age of 70 years, we calculated 382 fewer cases compared with the 6156 cases expected. The long-term benefit of COCP use diminished after risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy followed by menopausal hormone therapy use. CONCLUSION: Although COCP use in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers initially increases breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer risk, it strongly decreases lifetime cancer risk. Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and menopausal hormone therapy use appear to counteract the long-term COCP-benefit.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Mendelian randomisation study of smoking exposure in relation to breast cancer risk
    Park, HA ; Neumeyer, S ; Michailidou, K ; Bolla, MK ; Wang, Q ; Dennis, J ; Ahearn, TU ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Antonenkova, NN ; Arndt, V ; Aronson, KJ ; Augustinsson, A ; Baten, A ; Freeman, LEB ; Becher, H ; Beckmann, MW ; Behrens, S ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Bogdanova, N ; Bojesen, SE ; Brauch, H ; Brenner, H ; Brucker, SY ; Burwinkel, B ; Campa, D ; Canzian, F ; Castelao, JE ; Chanock, SJ ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Clarke, CL ; Conroy, DM ; Couch, FJ ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Czene, K ; Daly, MB ; Devilee, P ; Dork, T ; Dos-Santos-Silva, I ; Dwek, M ; Eccles, DM ; Eliassen, AH ; Engel, C ; Eriksson, M ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Flyger, H ; Fritschi, L ; Garcia-Closas, M ; Garcia-Saenz, JA ; Gaudet, MM ; Giles, GG ; Glendon, G ; Goldberg, MS ; Goldgar, DE ; Gonzalez-Neira, A ; Grip, M ; Guenel, P ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Hakansson, N ; Hall, P ; Hamann, U ; Han, S ; Harkness, EF ; Hart, SN ; He, W ; Heemskerk-Gerritsen, BAM ; Hopper, JL ; Hunter, DJ ; Jager, A ; Jakubowska, A ; John, EM ; Jung, A ; Kaaks, R ; Kapoor, PM ; Keeman, R ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kitahara, CM ; Koppert, LB ; Koutros, S ; Kristensen, VN ; Kurian, AW ; Lacey, J ; Lambrechts, D ; LeMarchand, L ; Lo, W-Y ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoochehri, M ; Margolin, S ; ElenaMartinez, M ; Mavroudis, D ; Meindl, A ; Menon, U ; Milne, RL ; Muranen, TA ; Nevanlinna, H ; Newman, WG ; Nordestgaard, BG ; Offit, K ; Olshan, AF ; Olsson, H ; Park-Simon, T-W ; Peterlongo, P ; Peto, J ; Plaseska-Karanfilska, D ; Presneau, N ; Radice, P ; Rennert, G ; Rennert, HS ; Romero, A ; Saloustros, E ; Sawyer, EJ ; Schmidt, MK ; Schmutzler, RK ; Schoemaker, MJ ; Schwentner, L ; Scott, C ; Shah, M ; Shu, X-O ; Simard, J ; Smeets, A ; Southey, MC ; Spinelli, JJ ; Stevens, V ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Tamimi, RM ; Tapper, WJ ; Taylor, JA ; Terry, MB ; Tomlinson, I ; Troester, MA ; Truong, T ; Vachon, CM ; van Veen, EM ; Vijai, J ; Wang, S ; Wendt, C ; Winqvist, R ; Wolk, A ; Ziogas, A ; Dunning, AM ; Pharoah, PDP ; Easton, DF ; Zheng, W ; Kraft, P ; Chang-Claude, J (SPRINGERNATURE, 2021-10-12)
    BACKGROUND: Despite a modest association between tobacco smoking and breast cancer risk reported by recent epidemiological studies, it is still equivocal whether smoking is causally related to breast cancer risk. METHODS: We applied Mendelian randomisation (MR) to evaluate a potential causal effect of cigarette smoking on breast cancer risk. Both individual-level data as well as summary statistics for 164 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) reported in genome-wide association studies of lifetime smoking index (LSI) or cigarette per day (CPD) were used to obtain MR effect estimates. Data from 108,420 invasive breast cancer cases and 87,681 controls were used for the LSI analysis and for the CPD analysis conducted among ever-smokers from 26,147 cancer cases and 26,072 controls. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address pleiotropy. RESULTS: Genetically predicted LSI was associated with increased breast cancer risk (OR 1.18 per SD, 95% CI: 1.07-1.30, P = 0.11 × 10-2), but there was no evidence of association for genetically predicted CPD (OR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.78-1.19, P = 0.85). The sensitivity analyses yielded similar results and showed no strong evidence of pleiotropic effect. CONCLUSION: Our MR study provides supportive evidence for a potential causal association with breast cancer risk for lifetime smoking exposure but not cigarettes per day among smokers.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Benign breast disease increases breast cancer risk independent of underlying familial risk profile: Findings from a Prospective Family Study Cohort
    Zeinomar, N ; Phillips, K-A ; Daly, MB ; Milne, RL ; Dite, GS ; MacInnis, RJ ; Liao, Y ; Kehm, RD ; Knight, JA ; Southey, MC ; Chung, WK ; Giles, GG ; McLachlan, S-A ; Friedlander, ML ; Weideman, PC ; Glendon, G ; Nesci, S ; Andrulis, IL ; Buys, SS ; John, EM ; Hopper, JL ; Terry, MB (WILEY, 2019-07-15)
    Benign breast disease (BBD) is an established breast cancer (BC) risk factor, but it is unclear whether the magnitude of the association applies to women at familial or genetic risk. This information is needed to improve BC risk assessment in clinical settings. Using the Prospective Family Study Cohort, we used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of BBD with BC risk. We also examined whether the association with BBD differed by underlying familial risk profile (FRP), calculated using absolute risk estimates from the Breast Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) model. During 176,756 person-years of follow-up (median: 10.9 years, maximum: 23.7) of 17,154 women unaffected with BC at baseline, we observed 968 incident cases of BC. A total of 4,704 (27%) women reported a history of BBD diagnosis at baseline. A history of BBD was associated with a greater risk of BC: HR = 1.31 (95% CI: 1.14-1.50), and did not differ by underlying FRP, with HRs of 1.35 (95% CI: 1.11-1.65), 1.26 (95% CI: 1.00-1.60), and 1.40 (95% CI: 1.01-1.93), for categories of full-lifetime BOADICEA score <20%, 20 to <35%, ≥35%, respectively. There was no difference in the association for women with BRCA1 mutations (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.04-2.58), women with BRCA2 mutations (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 0.78-2.3) or for women without a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.13-1.53) (pinteraction  = 0.95). Women with a history of BBD have an increased risk of BC that is independent of, and multiplies, their underlying familial and genetic risk.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Genome-wide association study identifies 32 novel breast cancer susceptibility loci from overall and subtype-specific analyses
    Zhan, H ; Ahearn, TU ; Lecarpentier, J ; Barnes, D ; Beesley, J ; Qi, G ; Jiang, X ; O'Mara, TA ; Zhao, N ; Bolla, MK ; Dunning, AM ; Dennis, J ; Wang, Q ; Abu Ful, Z ; Aittomaki, K ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Arndt, V ; Aronson, KJ ; Arun, BK ; Auer, PL ; Azzollini, J ; Barrowdale, D ; Becher, H ; Beckmann, MW ; Behrens, S ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Bialkowska, K ; Blanco, A ; Blomqvist, C ; Bogdanova, N ; Bojesen, SE ; Bonanni, B ; Bondavalli, D ; Borg, A ; Brauch, H ; Brenner, H ; Briceno, I ; Broeks, A ; Brucker, SY ; Bruening, T ; Burwinkel, B ; Buys, SS ; Byers, H ; Caldes, T ; Caligo, MA ; Calvello, M ; Campa, D ; Castelao, JE ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chanock, SJ ; Christiaens, M ; Christiansen, H ; Chung, WK ; Claes, KBM ; Clarke, CL ; Cornelissen, S ; Couch, FJ ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Czene, K ; Daly, MB ; Devilee, P ; Diez, O ; Domchek, SM ; Doerk, T ; Dwek, M ; Eccles, DM ; Ekici, AB ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Figueroa, J ; Foretova, L ; Fostira, F ; Friedman, E ; Frost, D ; Gago-Dominguez, M ; Gapstur, SM ; Garber, J ; Garcia-Saenz, JA ; Gaudet, MM ; Gayther, SA ; Giles, GG ; Godwin, AK ; Goldberg, MS ; Goldgar, DE ; Gonzalez-Neira, A ; Greene, MH ; Gronwald, J ; Guenel, P ; Haeberle, L ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Hake, CR ; Hall, P ; Hamann, U ; Harkness, EF ; Heemskerk-Gerritsen, BAM ; Hillemanns, P ; Hogervorst, FBL ; Holleczek, B ; Hollestelle, A ; Hooning, MJ ; Hoover, RN ; Hopper, JL ; Howell, A ; Huebner, H ; Hulick, PJ ; Imyanitov, EN ; Isaacs, C ; Izatt, L ; Jager, A ; Jakimovska, M ; Jakubowska, A ; James, P ; Janavicius, R ; Janni, W ; John, EM ; Jones, ME ; Jung, A ; Kaaks, R ; Kapoor, PM ; Karlan, BY ; Keeman, R ; Khan, S ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kitahara, CM ; Ko, Y-D ; Konstantopoulou, I ; Koppert, LB ; Koutros, S ; Kristensen, VN ; Laenkholm, A-V ; Lambrechts, D ; Larsson, SC ; Laurent-Puig, P ; Lazaro, C ; Lazarova, E ; Lejbkowicz, F ; Leslie, G ; Lesueur, F ; Lindblom, A ; Lissowska, J ; Lo, W-Y ; Loud, JT ; Lubinski, J ; Lukomska, A ; MacInnis, RJ ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoochehri, M ; Manoukian, S ; Margolin, S ; Martinez, ME ; Matricardi, L ; McGuffog, L ; McLean, C ; Mebirouk, N ; Meindl, A ; Menon, U ; Miller, A ; Mingazheva, E ; Montagna, M ; Mulligan, AM ; Mulot, C ; Muranen, TA ; Nathanson, KL ; Neuhausen, SL ; Nevanlinna, H ; Neven, P ; Newman, WG ; Nielsens, FC ; Nikitina-Zake, L ; Nodora, J ; Offit, K ; Olah, E ; Olopade, O ; Olsson, H ; Orr, N ; Papi, L ; Papp, J ; Park-Simon, T-W ; Parsons, MT ; Peissel, B ; Peixoto, A ; Peshkin, B ; Peterlongo, P ; Peto, J ; Phillips, K-A ; Piedmonte, M ; Plaseska-Karanfilska, D ; Prajzendanc, K ; Prentice, R ; Prokofyeva, D ; Rack, B ; Radice, P ; Ramus, SJ ; Rantala, J ; Rashid, MU ; Rennert, G ; Rennert, HS ; Risch, HA ; Romero, A ; Rookus, MA ; Ruebner, M ; Ruediger, T ; Saloustros, E ; Sampson, S ; Sandler, DP ; Sawyer, EJ ; Scheuner, MT ; Schmutzler, RK ; Schneeweiss, A ; Schoemaker, MJ ; Schoettker, B ; Schuermann, P ; Senter, L ; Sharma, P ; Sherman, ME ; Shu, X-O ; Singer, CF ; Smichkoska, S ; Soucy, P ; Southey, MC ; Spinelli, JJ ; Stone, J ; Stoppa-Lyonnet, D ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Szabo, C ; Tamimi, RM ; Tapper, WJ ; Taylor, JA ; Teixeira, MR ; Terry, M ; Thomassen, M ; Thull, DL ; Tischkowitz, M ; Toland, AE ; Tollenaar, RAEM ; Tomlinson, I ; Torres, D ; Troester, MA ; Truong, T ; Tung, N ; Untch, M ; Vachon, CM ; van den Ouweland, AMW ; van der Kolk, LE ; van Veen, EM ; vanRensburg, EJ ; Vega, A ; Wappenschmidt, B ; Weinberg, CR ; Weitzel, JN ; Wildiers, H ; Winqvist, R ; Wolk, A ; Yang, XR ; Yannoukakos, D ; Zheng, W ; Zorn, KK ; Milne, RL ; Kraft, P ; Simard, J ; Pharoah, PDP ; Michailidou, K ; Antoniou, AC ; Schmidt, MK ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Easton, DF ; Chatterjee, N ; Garcia-Closas, M (NATURE RESEARCH, 2020-06)
    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 < 5.0 × 10-8), 15 of which showed evidence for associations with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 0.05). Five loci showed associations (P < 0.05) in opposite directions between luminal and non-luminal subtypes. In silico analyses showed that these five loci contained cell-specific enhancers that differed between normal luminal and basal mammary cells. The genetic correlations between five intrinsic-like subtypes ranged from 0.35 to 0.80. The proportion of genome-wide chip heritability explained by all known susceptibility loci was 54.2% for luminal A-like disease and 37.6% for triple-negative disease. The odds ratios of polygenic risk scores, which included 330 variants, for the highest 1% of quantiles compared with middle quantiles were 5.63 and 3.02 for luminal A-like and triple-negative disease, respectively. These findings provide an improved understanding of genetic predisposition to breast cancer subtypes and will inform the development of subtype-specific polygenic risk scores.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    CYP3A7*1C allele: linking premenopausal oestrone and progesterone levels with risk of hormone receptor-positive breast cancers
    Johnson, N ; Maguire, S ; Morra, A ; Kapoor, PM ; Tomczyk, K ; Jones, ME ; Schoemaker, MJ ; Gilham, C ; Bolla, MK ; Wang, Q ; Dennis, J ; Ahearn, TU ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Antonenkova, NN ; Arndt, V ; Aronson, KJ ; Augustinsson, A ; Baynes, C ; Freeman, LEB ; Beckmann, MW ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Blomqvist, C ; Boeckx, B ; Bogdanova, NV ; Bojesen, SE ; Brauch, H ; Brenner, H ; Burwinkel, B ; Campa, D ; Canzian, F ; Castelao, JE ; Chanock, SJ ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Clarke, CL ; Conroy, DM ; Couch, FJ ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Czene, K ; Doerk, T ; Eliassen, AH ; Engel, C ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Figueroa, J ; Floris, G ; Flyger, H ; Gago-Dominguez, M ; Gapstur, SM ; Garcia-Closas, M ; Gaudet, MM ; Giles, GG ; Goldberg, MS ; Gonzalez-Neira, A ; Guenel, P ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Hakansson, N ; Hall, P ; Hamann, U ; Harrington, PA ; Hart, SN ; Hooning, MJ ; Hopper, JL ; Howell, A ; Hunter, DJ ; Jager, A ; Jakubowska, A ; John, EM ; Kaaks, R ; Keeman, R ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kitahara, CM ; Kosma, V-M ; Koutros, S ; Kraft, P ; Kristensen, VN ; Kurian, AW ; Lambrechts, D ; Le Marchand, L ; Linet, M ; Lubinski, J ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoukian, S ; Margolin, S ; Martens, JWM ; Mavroudis, D ; Mayes, R ; Meindl, A ; Milne, RL ; Neuhausen, SL ; Nevanlinna, H ; Newman, WG ; Nielsen, SF ; Nordestgaard, BG ; Obi, N ; Olshan, AF ; Olson, JE ; Olsson, H ; Orban, E ; Park-Simon, T-W ; Peterlongo, P ; Plaseska-Karanfilska, D ; Pylkas, K ; Rennert, G ; Rennert, HS ; Ruddy, KJ ; Saloustros, E ; Sandler, DP ; Sawyer, EJ ; Schmutzler, RK ; Scott, C ; Shu, X-O ; Simard, J ; Smichkoska, S ; Sohn, C ; Southey, MC ; Spinelli, JJ ; Stone, J ; Tamimi, RM ; Taylor, JA ; Tollenaar, RAEM ; Tomlinson, I ; Troester, MA ; Truong, T ; Vachon, CM ; van Veen, EM ; Wang, SS ; Weinberg, CR ; Wendt, C ; Wildiers, H ; Winqvist, R ; Wolk, A ; Zheng, W ; Ziogas, A ; Dunning, AM ; Pharoah, PDP ; Easton, DF ; Howie, AF ; Peto, J ; dos-Santos-Silva, I ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Chang-Claude, J ; Schmidt, MK ; Orr, N ; Fletcher, O (SPRINGERNATURE, 2021-02-16)
    BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies provide strong evidence for a role of endogenous sex hormones in the aetiology of breast cancer. The aim of this analysis was to identify genetic variants that are associated with urinary sex-hormone levels and breast cancer risk. METHODS: We carried out a genome-wide association study of urinary oestrone-3-glucuronide and pregnanediol-3-glucuronide levels in 560 premenopausal women, with additional analysis of progesterone levels in 298 premenopausal women. To test for the association with breast cancer risk, we carried out follow-up genotyping in 90,916 cases and 89,893 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. All women were of European ancestry. RESULTS: For pregnanediol-3-glucuronide, there were no genome-wide significant associations; for oestrone-3-glucuronide, we identified a single peak mapping to the CYP3A locus, annotated by rs45446698. The minor rs45446698-C allele was associated with lower oestrone-3-glucuronide (-49.2%, 95% CI -56.1% to -41.1%, P = 3.1 × 10-18); in follow-up analyses, rs45446698-C was also associated with lower progesterone (-26.7%, 95% CI -39.4% to -11.6%, P = 0.001) and reduced risk of oestrogen and progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.82-0.91, P = 6.9 × 10-8). CONCLUSIONS: The CYP3A7*1C allele is associated with reduced risk of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer possibly mediated via an effect on the metabolism of endogenous sex hormones in premenopausal women.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Alcohol Consumption, Cigarette Smoking, and Risk of Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: Results from The BRCA1 and BRCA2 Cohort Consortium
    Li, H ; Terry, MB ; Antoniou, AC ; Phillips, K-A ; Kast, K ; Mooij, TM ; Engel, C ; Nogues, C ; Stoppa-Lyonnet, D ; Lasset, C ; Berthet, P ; Mari, V ; Caron, O ; Barrowdale, D ; Frost, D ; Brewer, C ; Evans, DG ; Izatt, L ; Side, L ; Walker, L ; Tischkowitz, M ; Rogers, MT ; Porteous, ME ; Snape, K ; Meijers-Heijboer, HEJ ; Gille, JJP ; Blok, MJ ; Hoogerbrugge, N ; Daly, MB ; Andrulis, IL ; Buys, SS ; John, EM ; McLachlan, S-A ; Friedlander, M ; Tan, YY ; Osorio, A ; Caldes, T ; Jakubowska, A ; Simard, J ; Singer, CF ; Olah, E ; Navratilova, M ; Foretova, L ; Gerdes, A-M ; Roos-Blom, M-J ; Arver, B ; Olsson, H ; Schmutzler, RK ; Hopper, JL ; Milne, RL ; Easton, DF ; Van Leeuwen, FE ; Rookus, MA ; Andrieu, N ; Goldgar, DE (AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH, 2020-02)
    BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption have been intensively studied in the general population to assess their effects on the risk of breast cancer, but very few studies have examined these effects in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Given the high breast cancer risk for mutation carriers and the importance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in DNA repair, better evidence on the associations of these lifestyle factors with breast cancer risk is essential. METHODS: Using a large international pooled cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, we conducted retrospective (5,707 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 3,525 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and prospective (2,276 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 1,610 BRCA2 mutation carriers) analyses of alcohol and tobacco consumption using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: For both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, none of the smoking-related variables was associated with breast cancer risk, except smoking for more than 5 years before a first full-term pregnancy (FFTP) when compared with parous women who never smoked. For BRCA1 mutation carriers, the HR from retrospective analysis (HRR) was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.39] and the HR from prospective analysis (HRP) was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.99-1.87). For BRCA2 mutation carriers, smoking for more than 5 years before an FFTP showed an association of a similar magnitude, but the confidence limits were wider (HRR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55 and HRP = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83-2.01). For both carrier groups, alcohol consumption was not associated with breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: The finding that smoking during the prereproductive years increases breast cancer risk for mutation carriers warrants further investigation. IMPACT: This is the largest prospective study of BRCA mutation carriers to assess these important risk factors.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Body mass index and breast cancer survival: a Mendelian randomization analysis
    Guo, Q ; Burgess, S ; Turman, C ; Bolla, MK ; Wang, Q ; Lush, M ; Abraham, J ; Aittomaki, K ; Andrulis, IL ; Apicella, C ; Arndt, V ; Barrdahl, M ; Benitez, J ; Berg, CD ; Blomqvist, C ; Bojesen, SE ; Bonanni, B ; Brand, JS ; Brenner, H ; Broeks, A ; Burwinkel, B ; Caldas, C ; Campa, D ; Canzian, F ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chanock, SJ ; Chin, S-F ; Couch, FJ ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Cybulski, C ; Czene, K ; Darabi, H ; Devilee, P ; Diver, WR ; Dunning, AM ; Earl, HM ; Eccles, DM ; Ekici, AB ; Eriksson, M ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Figueroa, J ; Flesch-Janys, D ; Flyger, H ; Gapstur, SM ; Gaudet, MM ; Giles, GG ; Glendon, G ; Grip, M ; Gronwald, J ; Haeberle, L ; Haiman, CA ; Hall, P ; Hamann, U ; Hankinson, S ; Hartikainen, JM ; Hein, A ; Hiller, L ; Hogervorst, FB ; Holleczek, B ; Hooning, MJ ; Hoover, RN ; Humphreys, K ; Hunter, DJ ; Husing, A ; Jakubowska, A ; Jukkola-Vuorinen, A ; Kaaks, R ; Kabisch, M ; Kataja, V ; Knight, JA ; Koppert, LB ; Kosma, V-M ; Kristensen, VN ; Lambrechts, D ; Le Marchand, L ; Li, J ; Lindblom, A ; Lindstrom, S ; Lissowska, J ; Lubinski, J ; Machiela, MJ ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoukian, S ; Margolin, S ; Marme, F ; Martens, JWM ; McLean, C ; Menendez, P ; Milne, RL ; Mulligan, AM ; Muranen, TA ; Nevanlinna, H ; Neven, P ; Nielsen, SF ; Nordestgaard, BG ; Olson, JE ; Perez, JIA ; Peterlongo, P ; Phillips, K-A ; Poole, CJ ; Pylkas, K ; Radice, P ; Rahman, N ; Rudiger, T ; Rudolph, A ; Sawyer, EJ ; Schumacher, F ; Seibold, P ; Seynaeve, C ; Shah, M ; Smeets, A ; Southey, MC ; Tollenaar, RAEM ; Tomlinson, I ; Tsimiklis, H ; Ulmer, H-U ; Vachon, C ; van den Ouweland, AMW ; Van't Veer, LJ ; Wildiers, H ; Willett, W ; Winqvist, R ; Zamora, MP ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Dork, T ; Easton, DF ; Garcia-Closas, M ; Kraft, P ; Hopper, JL ; Zheng, W ; Schmidt, MK ; Pharoah, PDP (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2017-12)
    BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that elevated body mass index (BMI) is associated with reduced survival for women with breast cancer. However, the underlying reasons remain unclear. We conducted a Mendelian randomization analysis to investigate a possible causal role of BMI in survival from breast cancer. METHODS: We used individual-level data from six large breast cancer case-cohorts including a total of 36 210 individuals (2475 events) of European ancestry. We created a BMI genetic risk score (GRS) based on genotypes at 94 known BMI-associated genetic variants. Association between the BMI genetic score and breast cancer survival was analysed by Cox regression for each study separately. Study-specific hazard ratios were pooled using fixed-effect meta-analysis. RESULTS: BMI genetic score was found to be associated with reduced breast cancer-specific survival for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cases [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.11, per one-unit increment of GRS, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.22, P = 0.03). We observed no association for ER-negative cases (HR = 1.00, per one-unit increment of GRS, 95% CI 0.89-1.13, P = 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a causal effect of increased BMI on reduced breast cancer survival for ER-positive breast cancer. There is no evidence of a causal effect of higher BMI on survival for ER-negative breast cancer cases.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Breast cancer risk prediction using a polygenic risk score in the familial setting: a prospective study from the Breast Cancer Family Registry and kConFab
    Li, H ; Feng, B ; Miron, A ; Chen, X ; Beesley, J ; Bimeh, E ; Barrowdale, D ; John, EM ; Daly, MB ; Andrulis, IL ; Buys, SS ; Kraft, P ; Thorne, H ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Southey, MC ; Antoniou, AC ; James, PA ; Terry, MB ; Phillips, K-A ; Hopper, JL ; Mitchell, G ; Goldgar, DE (NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, 2017-01)
    PURPOSE: This study examined the utility of sets of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in familial but non-BRCA-associated breast cancer (BC). METHODS: We derived a polygenic risk score (PRS) based on 24 known BC risk SNPs for 4,365 women from the Breast Cancer Family Registry and Kathleen Cuningham Consortium Foundation for Research into Familial Breast Cancer familial BC cohorts. We compared scores for women based on cancer status at baseline; 2,599 women unaffected at enrollment were followed-up for an average of 7.4 years. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the association of PRS with BC risk. The BOADICEA risk prediction algorithm was used to measure risk based on family history alone. RESULTS: The mean PRS at baseline was 2.25 (SD, 0.35) for affected women and was 2.17 (SD, 0.35) for unaffected women from combined cohorts (P < 10-6). During follow-up, 205 BC cases occurred. The hazard ratios for continuous PRS (per SD) and upper versus lower quintiles were 1.38 (95% confidence interval: 1.22-1.56) and 3.18 (95% confidence interval: 1.84-5.23) respectively. Based on their PRS-based predicted risk, management for up to 23% of women could be altered. CONCLUSION: Including BC-associated SNPs in risk assessment can provide more accurate risk prediction than family history alone and can influence recommendations for cancer screening and prevention modalities for high-risk women.Genet Med 19 1, 30-35.