Display options
Cite
Jia G, Lu Y, Wen W, et al. Evaluating the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Identifying High-Risk Individuals for Eight Common Cancers. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020;4(3):pkaa021doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa021.
Jia, G., Lu, Y., Wen, W., Long, J., Liu, Y., Tao, R., Li, B., Denny, J. C., Shu, X. O., & Zheng, W. (2020). Evaluating the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Identifying High-Risk Individuals for Eight Common Cancers. JNCI cancer spectrum, 4(3), pkaa021. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkaa021
Jia, Guochong, et al. "Evaluating the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Identifying High-Risk Individuals for Eight Common Cancers." JNCI cancer spectrum vol. 4,3 (2020): pkaa021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkaa021
Jia G, Lu Y, Wen W, Long J, Liu Y, Tao R, Li B, Denny JC, Shu XO, Zheng W. Evaluating the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Identifying High-Risk Individuals for Eight Common Cancers. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020 Mar 12;4(3):pkaa021. doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa021. eCollection 2020 Jun. PMID: 32596635; PMCID: PMC7306192.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020 Mar 12;4(3):pkaa021. doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa021. eCollection 2020 Jun.

Evaluating the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Identifying High-Risk Individuals for Eight Common Cancers.

JNCI cancer spectrum

Guochong Jia, Yingchang Lu, Wanqing Wen, Jirong Long, Ying Liu, Ran Tao, Bingshan Li, Joshua C Denny, Xiao-Ou Shu, Wei Zheng

Affiliations

  1. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
  2. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
  3. Vanderbilt Genetics Institute, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
  4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

PMID: 32596635 PMCID: PMC7306192 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa021

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies have identified common genetic risk variants in many loci associated with multiple cancers. We sought to systematically evaluate the utility of these risk variants in identifying high-risk individuals for eight common cancers.

METHODS: We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using genome-wide association studies-identified risk variants for each cancer. Using data from 400 812 participants of European descent in a population-based cohort study, UK Biobank, we estimated hazard ratios associated with PRS using Cox proportional hazard models and evaluated the performance of the PRS in cancer risk prediction and their ability to identify individuals at more than a twofold elevated risk, a risk level comparable to a moderate-penetrance mutation in known cancer predisposition genes.

RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 5.8 years, 14 584 incident case patients of cancers were identified (ranging from 358 epithelial ovarian cancer case patients to 4430 prostate cancer case patients). Compared with those at an average risk, individuals among the highest 5% of the PRS had a two- to threefold elevated risk for cancer of the prostate, breast, pancreas, colorectal, or ovary, and an approximately 1.5-fold elevated risk of cancer of the lung, bladder, or kidney. The areas under the curve ranged from 0.567 to 0.662. Using PRS, 40.4% of the study participants can be classified as having more than a twofold elevated risk for at least one site-specific cancer.

CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of the general population can be identified at an elevated cancer risk by PRS, supporting the potential clinical utility of PRS for personalized cancer risk prediction.

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press.

References

  1. J Med Genet. 2018 Aug;55(8):546-554 - PubMed
  2. Nat Genet. 2006 Aug;38(8):873-5 - PubMed
  3. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Dec;13(12):2078-83 - PubMed
  4. Gut. 2014 Feb;63(2):326-36 - PubMed
  5. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;35(10):1086-1095 - PubMed
  6. Breast Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 8;18(1):124 - PubMed
  7. Nature. 2015 Oct 1;526(7571):68-74 - PubMed
  8. Nat Genet. 2002 May;31(1):55-9 - PubMed
  9. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Sep 1;4(9):1228-1235 - PubMed
  10. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016 Sep;13(9):581-8 - PubMed
  11. Int J Cancer. 2017 Sep 15;141(6):1130-1139 - PubMed
  12. Br J Cancer. 2013 Aug 6;109(3):751-5 - PubMed
  13. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016 Sep;16(9):599-612 - PubMed
  14. PLoS Genet. 2013 Mar;9(3):e1003348 - PubMed
  15. Am J Hum Genet. 2019 Jan 3;104(1):21-34 - PubMed
  16. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019 Jan;69(1):7-34 - PubMed
  17. Curr Oncol. 2018 Apr;25(2):e176-e180 - PubMed
  18. Nat Genet. 2013 Apr;45(4):400-5, 405e1-3 - PubMed
  19. N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 4;372(23):2243-57 - PubMed
  20. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2017 Sep 13;3:34 - PubMed
  21. JAMA. 2016 Jun 21;315(23):2564-2575 - PubMed
  22. PLoS Med. 2015 Mar 31;12(3):e1001779 - PubMed
  23. Nat Genet. 2018 Jul;50(7):928-936 - PubMed
  24. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424 - PubMed
  25. Bioinformatics. 2010 Nov 15;26(22):2867-73 - PubMed
  26. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 Jun 1;112(6):590-598 - PubMed
  27. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Jul 7;102(13):972-81 - PubMed
  28. Cancer. 2015 Jan 15;121(2):269-75 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support