Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 19
  • 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, 2022-03-01)
    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
    Correction: Polygenic risk modeling for prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer risk.
    Dareng, EO ; Tyrer, JP ; Barnes, DR ; Jones, MR ; Yang, X ; Aben, KKH ; Adank, MA ; Agata, S ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Antonenkova, NN ; Aravantinos, G ; Arun, BK ; Augustinsson, A ; Balmaña, J ; Bandera, EV ; Barkardottir, RB ; Barrowdale, D ; Beckmann, MW ; Beeghly-Fadiel, A ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Bernardini, MQ ; Bjorge, L ; Black, A ; Bogdanova, NV ; Bonanni, B ; Borg, A ; Brenton, JD ; Budzilowska, A ; Butzow, R ; Buys, SS ; Cai, H ; Caligo, MA ; Campbell, I ; Cannioto, R ; Cassingham, H ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chanock, SJ ; Chen, K ; Chiew, Y-E ; Chung, WK ; Claes, KBM ; Colonna, S ; GEMO Study Collaborators, ; GC-HBOC Study Collaborators, ; EMBRACE Collaborators, ; Cook, LS ; Couch, FJ ; Daly, MB ; Dao, F ; Davies, E ; de la Hoya, M ; de Putter, R ; Dennis, J ; DePersia, A ; Devilee, P ; Diez, O ; Ding, YC ; Doherty, JA ; Domchek, SM ; Dörk, T ; du Bois, A ; Dürst, M ; Eccles, DM ; Eliassen, HA ; Engel, C ; Evans, GD ; Fasching, PA ; Flanagan, JM ; Fortner, RT ; Machackova, E ; Friedman, E ; Ganz, PA ; Garber, J ; Gensini, F ; Giles, GG ; Glendon, G ; Godwin, AK ; Goodman, MT ; Greene, MH ; Gronwald, J ; OPAL Study Group, ; AOCS Group, ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Håkansson, N ; Hamann, U ; Hansen, TVO ; Harris, HR ; Hartman, M ; Heitz, F ; Hildebrandt, MAT ; Høgdall, E ; Høgdall, CK ; Hopper, JL ; Huang, R-Y ; Huff, C ; Hulick, PJ ; Huntsman, DG ; Imyanitov, EN ; KConFab Investigators, ; HEBON Investigators, ; Isaacs, C ; Jakubowska, A ; James, PA ; Janavicius, R ; Jensen, A ; Johannsson, OT ; John, EM ; Jones, ME ; Kang, D ; Karlan, BY ; Karnezis, A ; Kelemen, LE ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kiemeney, LA ; Kim, B-G ; Kjaer, SK ; Komenaka, I ; Kupryjanczyk, J ; Kurian, AW ; Kwong, A ; Lambrechts, D ; Larson, MC ; Lazaro, C ; Le, ND ; Leslie, G ; Lester, J ; Lesueur, F ; Levine, DA ; Li, L ; Li, J ; Loud, JT ; Lu, KH ; Lubiński, J ; Mai, PL ; Manoukian, S ; Marks, JR ; Matsuno, RK ; Matsuo, K ; May, T ; McGuffog, L ; McLaughlin, JR ; McNeish, IA ; Mebirouk, N ; Menon, U ; Miller, A ; Milne, RL ; Minlikeeva, A ; Modugno, F ; Montagna, M ; Moysich, KB ; Munro, E ; Nathanson, KL ; Neuhausen, SL ; Nevanlinna, H ; Yie, JNY ; Nielsen, HR ; Nielsen, FC ; Nikitina-Zake, L ; Odunsi, K ; Offit, K ; Olah, E ; Olbrecht, S ; Olopade, OI ; Olson, SH ; Olsson, H ; Osorio, A ; Papi, L ; Park, SK ; Parsons, MT ; Pathak, H ; Pedersen, IS ; Peixoto, A ; Pejovic, T ; Perez-Segura, P ; Permuth, JB ; Peshkin, B ; Peterlongo, P ; Piskorz, A ; Prokofyeva, D ; Radice, P ; Rantala, J ; Riggan, MJ ; Risch, HA ; Rodriguez-Antona, C ; Ross, E ; Rossing, MA ; Runnebaum, I ; Sandler, DP ; Santamariña, M ; Soucy, P ; Schmutzler, RK ; Setiawan, VW ; Shan, K ; Sieh, W ; Simard, J ; Singer, CF ; Sokolenko, AP ; Song, H ; Southey, MC ; Steed, H ; Stoppa-Lyonnet, D ; Sutphen, R ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Tan, YY ; Teixeira, MR ; Teo, SH ; Terry, KL ; Terry, MB ; OCAC Consortium, ; CIMBA Consortium, ; Thomassen, M ; Thompson, PJ ; Thomsen, LCV ; Thull, DL ; Tischkowitz, M ; Titus, L ; Toland, AE ; Torres, D ; Trabert, B ; Travis, R ; Tung, N ; Tworoger, SS ; Valen, E ; van Altena, AM ; van der Hout, AH ; Van Nieuwenhuysen, E ; van Rensburg, EJ ; Vega, A ; Edwards, DV ; Vierkant, RA ; Wang, F ; Wappenschmidt, B ; Webb, PM ; Weinberg, CR ; Weitzel, JN ; Wentzensen, N ; White, E ; Whittemore, AS ; Winham, SJ ; Wolk, A ; Woo, Y-L ; Wu, AH ; Yan, L ; Yannoukakos, D ; Zavaglia, KM ; Zheng, W ; Ziogas, A ; Zorn, KK ; Kleibl, Z ; Easton, D ; Lawrenson, K ; DeFazio, A ; Sellers, TA ; Ramus, SJ ; Pearce, CL ; Monteiro, AN ; Cunningham, J ; Goode, EL ; Schildkraut, JM ; Berchuck, A ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Gayther, SA ; Antoniou, AC ; Pharoah, PDP (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2022-05)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Polygenic risk modeling for prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer risk
    Dareng, EO ; Tyrer, JP ; Barnes, DR ; Jones, MR ; Yang, X ; Aben, KKH ; Adank, MA ; Agata, S ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Antonenkova, NN ; Aravantinos, G ; Arun, BK ; Augustinsson, A ; Balmana, J ; Bandera, E ; Barkardottir, RB ; Barrowdale, D ; Beckmann, MW ; Beeghly-Fadiel, A ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Bernardini, MQ ; Bjorge, L ; Black, A ; Bogdanova, N ; Bonanni, B ; Borg, A ; Brenton, JD ; Budzilowska, A ; Butzow, R ; Buys, SS ; Cai, H ; Caligo, MA ; Campbell, I ; Cannioto, R ; Cassingham, H ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chanock, SJ ; Chen, K ; Chiew, Y-E ; Chung, WK ; Claes, KBM ; Colonna, S ; Cook, LS ; Couch, FJ ; Daly, MB ; Dao, F ; Davies, E ; de la Hoya, M ; de Putter, R ; Dennis, J ; DePersia, A ; Devilee, P ; Diez, O ; Ding, YC ; Doherty, JA ; Domchek, SM ; Dork, T ; du Bois, A ; Durst, M ; Eccles, DM ; Eliassen, HA ; Engel, C ; Evans, GD ; Fasching, PA ; Flanagan, JM ; Fortner, R ; Machackova, E ; Friedman, E ; Ganz, PA ; Garber, J ; Gensini, F ; Giles, GG ; Glendon, G ; Godwin, AK ; Goodman, MT ; Greene, MH ; Gronwald, J ; Group, OS ; AOCSGroup, ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Hakansson, N ; Hamann, U ; Hansen, TVO ; Harris, HR ; Hartman, M ; Heitz, F ; Hildebrandt, MAT ; Hogdall, E ; Hogdall, CK ; Hopper, JL ; Huang, R-Y ; Huff, C ; Hulick, PJ ; Huntsman, DG ; Imyanitov, EN ; Isaacs, C ; Jakubowska, A ; James, PA ; Janavicius, R ; Jensen, A ; Johannsson, OT ; John, EM ; Jones, ME ; Kang, D ; Karlan, BY ; Karnezis, A ; Kelemen, LE ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kiemeney, LA ; Kim, B-G ; Kjaer, SK ; Komenaka, I ; Kupryjanczyk, J ; Kurian, AW ; Kwong, A ; Lambrechts, D ; Larson, MC ; Lazaro, C ; Le, ND ; Leslie, G ; Lester, J ; Lesueur, F ; Levine, DA ; Li, L ; Li, J ; Loud, JT ; Lu, KH ; Mai, PL ; Manoukian, S ; Marks, JR ; KimMatsuno, R ; Matsuo, K ; May, T ; McGuffog, L ; McLaughlin, JR ; McNeish, IA ; Mebirouk, N ; Menon, U ; Miller, A ; Milne, RL ; Minlikeeva, A ; Modugno, F ; Montagna, M ; Moysich, KB ; Munro, E ; Nathanson, KL ; Neuhausen, SL ; Nevanlinna, H ; Yie, JNY ; Nielsen, HR ; Nielsen, FC ; Nikitina-Zake, L ; Odunsi, K ; Offit, K ; Olah, E ; Olbrecht, S ; Olopade, O ; Olson, SH ; Olsson, H ; Osorio, A ; Papi, L ; Park, SK ; Parsons, MT ; Pathak, H ; Pedersen, IS ; Peixoto, A ; Pejovic, T ; Perez-Segura, P ; Permuth, JB ; Peshkin, B ; Peterlongo, P ; Piskorz, A ; Prokofyeva, D ; Radice, P ; Rantala, J ; Riggan, MJ ; Risch, HA ; Rodriguez-Antona, C ; Ross, E ; Rossing, MA ; Runnebaum, I ; Sandler, DP ; Santamarina, M ; Soucy, P ; Schmutzler, RK ; Setiawan, VW ; Shan, K ; Sieh, W ; Simard, J ; Singer, CF ; Sokolenko, AP ; Song, H ; Southey, MC ; Steed, H ; Stoppa-Lyonnet, D ; Sutphen, R ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Tan, YY ; Teixeira, MR ; Teo, SH ; Terry, KL ; BethTerry, M ; Thomassen, M ; Thompson, PJ ; Thomsen, LCV ; Thull, DL ; Tischkowitz, M ; Titus, L ; Toland, AE ; Torres, D ; Trabert, B ; Travis, R ; Tung, N ; Tworoger, SS ; Valen, E ; van Altena, AM ; van der Hout, AH ; Nieuwenhuysen, E ; van Rensburg, EJ ; Vega, A ; Edwards, DV ; Vierkant, RA ; Wang, F ; Wappenschmidt, B ; Webb, PM ; Weinberg, CR ; Weitzel, JN ; Wentzensen, N ; White, E ; Whittemore, AS ; Winham, SJ ; Wolk, A ; Woo, Y-L ; Wu, AH ; Yan, L ; Yannoukakos, D ; Zavaglia, KM ; Zheng, W ; Ziogas, A ; Zorn, KK ; Kleibl, Z ; Easton, D ; Lawrenson, K ; DeFazio, A ; Sellers, TA ; Ramus, SJ ; Pearce, CL ; Monteiro, AN ; Cunningham, J ; Goode, EL ; Schildkraut, JM ; Berchuck, A ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Gayther, SA ; Antoniou, AC ; Pharoah, PDP (SPRINGERNATURE, 2022-01-14)
    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.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Common variants in breast cancer risk loci predispose to distinct tumor subtypes
    Ahearn, TU ; Zhang, H ; Michailidou, K ; Milne, RL ; Bolla, MK ; Dennis, J ; Dunning, AM ; Lush, M ; Wang, Q ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Arndt, V ; Aronson, KJ ; Auer, PL ; Augustinsson, A ; Baten, A ; Becher, H ; Behrens, S ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Blomqvist, C ; Bojesen, SE ; Bonanni, B ; Borresen-Dale, A-L ; Brauch, H ; Brenner, H ; Brooks-Wilson, A ; Bruening, T ; Burwinkel, B ; Buys, SS ; Canzian, F ; Castelao, JE ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chanock, SJ ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Clarke, CL ; Collee, JM ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Czene, K ; Daly, MB ; Devilee, P ; Dork, T ; Dwek, M ; Eccles, DM ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Figueroa, J ; Floris, G ; Gago-Dominguez, M ; Gapstur, SM ; Garcia-Saenz, JA ; Gaudet, MM ; Giles, GG ; Goldberg, MS ; Gonzalez-Neira, A ; Alnaes, GIG ; Grip, M ; Guenel, P ; Haiman, CA ; Hall, P ; Hamann, U ; Harkness, EF ; Heemskerk-Gerritsen, BAM ; Holleczek, B ; Hollestelle, A ; Hooning, MJ ; Hoover, RN ; Hopper, JL ; Howell, A ; Jakimovska, M ; Jakubowska, A ; John, EM ; Jones, ME ; Jung, A ; Kaaks, R ; Kauppila, S ; Keeman, R ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kitahara, CM ; Ko, Y-D ; Koutros, S ; Kristensen, VN ; Kruger, U ; Kubelka-Sabit, K ; Kurian, AW ; Kyriacou, K ; Lambrechts, D ; Lee, DG ; Lindblom, A ; Linet, M ; Lissowska, J ; Llaneza, A ; Lo, W-Y ; MacInnis, RJ ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoochehri, M ; Margolin, S ; Martinez, ME ; McLean, C ; Meindl, A ; Menon, U ; Nevanlinna, H ; Newman, WG ; Nodora, J ; Offit, K ; Olsson, H ; Orr, N ; Park-Simon, T-W ; Patel, A ; Peto, J ; Pita, G ; Plaseska-Karanfilska, D ; Prentice, R ; Punie, K ; Pylkas, K ; Radice, P ; Rennert, G ; Romero, A ; Ruediger, T ; Saloustros, E ; Sampson, S ; Sandler, DP ; Sawyer, EJ ; Schmutzler, RK ; Schoemaker, MJ ; Schottker, B ; Sherman, ME ; Shu, X-O ; Smichkoska, S ; Southey, MC ; Spinelli, JJ ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Tamimi, RM ; Tapper, WJ ; Taylor, JA ; Teras, LR ; Terry, MB ; Torres, D ; Troester, MA ; Vachon, CM ; van Deurzen, CHM ; van Veen, EM ; Wagner, P ; Weinberg, CR ; Wendt, C ; Wesseling, J ; Winqvist, R ; Wolk, A ; Yang, XR ; Zheng, W ; Couch, FJ ; Simard, J ; Kraft, P ; Easton, DF ; Pharoah, PDP ; Schmidt, MK ; Garcia-Closas, M ; Chatterjee, N (BMC, 2022-01-04)
    BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified multiple common breast cancer susceptibility variants. Many of these variants have differential associations by estrogen receptor (ER) status, but how these variants relate with other tumor features and intrinsic molecular subtypes is unclear. METHODS: Among 106,571 invasive breast cancer cases and 95,762 controls of European ancestry with data on 173 breast cancer variants identified in previous GWAS, we used novel two-stage polytomous logistic regression models to evaluate variants in relation to multiple tumor features (ER, progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and grade) adjusting for each other, and to intrinsic-like subtypes. RESULTS: Eighty-five of 173 variants were associated with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 5%), most commonly ER and grade, followed by PR and HER2. Models for intrinsic-like subtypes found nearly all of these variants (83 of 85) associated at p < 0.05 with risk for at least one luminal-like subtype, and approximately half (41 of 85) of the variants were associated with risk of at least one non-luminal subtype, including 32 variants associated with triple-negative (TN) disease. Ten variants were associated with risk of all subtypes in different magnitude. Five variants were associated with risk of luminal A-like and TN subtypes in opposite directions. CONCLUSION: This report demonstrates a high level of complexity in the etiology heterogeneity of breast cancer susceptibility variants and can inform investigations of subtype-specific risk prediction.
  • 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, 2021-12-08)
    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
    Alcohol and tobacco use and risk of multiple myeloma: A case‐control study
    Cheah, S ; Bassett, JK ; Bruinsma, FJ ; Cozen, W ; Hopper, JL ; Jayasekara, H ; Joshua, D ; MacInnis, RJ ; Prince, HM ; Vajdic, CM ; Leeuwen, MT ; Doo, NW ; Harrison, SJ ; English, DR ; Giles, GG ; Milne, RL (Wiley, 2022-02)
  • 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, 2022-01-20)
    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
    Rare germline copy number variants (CNVs) and breast cancer risk
    Dennis, J ; Tyrer, JP ; Walker, LC ; Michailidou, K ; Dorling, L ; Bolla, MK ; Wang, Q ; Ahearn, TU ; Andrulis, IL ; Anton-Culver, H ; Antonenkova, NN ; Arndt, V ; Aronson, KJ ; Freeman, LEB ; Beckmann, MW ; Behrens, S ; Benitez, J ; Bermisheva, M ; Bogdanova, N ; Bojesen, SE ; Brenner, H ; Castelao, JE ; Chang-Claude, J ; Chenevix-Trench, G ; Clarke, CL ; Collee, JM ; Couch, FJ ; Cox, A ; Cross, SS ; Czene, K ; Devilee, P ; Dork, T ; Dossus, L ; Eliassen, AH ; Eriksson, M ; Evans, DG ; Fasching, PA ; Figueroa, J ; Fletcher, O ; Flyger, H ; Fritschi, L ; Gabrielson, M ; Gago-Dominguez, M ; Garcia-Closas, M ; Giles, GG ; Gonzalez-Neira, A ; Guenel, P ; Hahnen, E ; Haiman, CA ; Hall, P ; Hollestelle, A ; Hoppe, R ; Hopper, JL ; Howell, A ; Jager, A ; Jakubowska, A ; John, EM ; Johnson, N ; Jones, ME ; Jung, A ; Kaaks, R ; Keeman, R ; Khusnutdinova, E ; Kitahara, CM ; Ko, Y-D ; Kosma, V-M ; Koutros, S ; Kraft, P ; Kristensen, VN ; Kubelka-Sabit, K ; Kurian, AW ; Lacey, J ; Lambrechts, D ; Larson, NL ; Linet, M ; Ogrodniczak, A ; Mannermaa, A ; Manoukian, S ; Margolin, S ; Mavroudis, D ; Milne, RL ; Muranen, TA ; Murphy, RA ; Nevanlinna, H ; Olson, JE ; Olsson, H ; Park-Simon, T-W ; Perou, CM ; Peterlongo, P ; Plaseska-Karanfilska, D ; Pylkas, K ; Rennert, G ; Saloustros, E ; Sandler, DP ; Sawyer, EJ ; Schmidt, MK ; Schmutzler, RK ; Shibli, R ; Smeets, A ; Soucy, P ; Southey, MC ; Swerdlow, AJ ; Tamimi, RM ; Taylor, JA ; Teras, LR ; Terry, MB ; Tomlinson, I ; Troester, MA ; Truong, T ; Vachon, CM ; Wendt, C ; Winqvist, R ; Wolk, A ; Yang, XR ; Zheng, W ; Ziogas, A ; Simard, J ; Dunning, AM ; Pharoah, PDP ; Easton, DF (NATURE PORTFOLIO, 2022-01-18)
    Germline copy number variants (CNVs) are pervasive in the human genome but potential disease associations with rare CNVs have not been comprehensively assessed in large datasets. We analysed rare CNVs in genes and non-coding regions for 86,788 breast cancer cases and 76,122 controls of European ancestry with genome-wide array data. Gene burden tests detected the strongest association for deletions in BRCA1 (P = 3.7E-18). Nine other genes were associated with a p-value < 0.01 including known susceptibility genes CHEK2 (P = 0.0008), ATM (P = 0.002) and BRCA2 (P = 0.008). Outside the known genes we detected associations with p-values < 0.001 for either overall or subtype-specific breast cancer at nine deletion regions and four duplication regions. Three of the deletion regions were in established common susceptibility loci. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first genome-wide analysis of rare CNVs in a large breast cancer case-control dataset. We detected associations with exonic deletions in established breast cancer susceptibility genes. We also detected suggestive associations with non-coding CNVs in known and novel loci with large effects sizes. Larger sample sizes will be required to reach robust levels of statistical significance.
  • 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, 2021-08-02)
    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
    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, 2020-05-18)
    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.