Literature DB >> 21114847

Evidence for SMAD3 as a modifier of breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Logan C Walker1, Zachary S Fredericksen, Xianshu Wang, Robert Tarrell, Vernon S Pankratz, Noralane M Lindor, Jonathan Beesley, Sue Healey, Xiaoqing Chen, Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet, Carole Tirapo, Sophie Giraud, Sylvie Mazoyer, Danièle Muller, Jean-Pierre Fricker, Capucine Delnatte, Rita K Schmutzler, Barbara Wappenschmidt, Christoph Engel, Ines Schönbuchner, Helmut Deissler, Alfons Meindl, Frans B Hogervorst, Martijn Verheus, Maartje J Hooning, Ans Mw van den Ouweland, Marcel R Nelen, Margreet Gem Ausems, Cora M Aalfs, Christi J van Asperen, Peter Devilee, Monique M Gerrits, Quinten Waisfisz, Csilla I Szabo, Douglas F Easton, Susan Peock, Margaret Cook, Clare T Oliver, Debra Frost, Patricia Harrington, D Gareth Evans, Fiona Lalloo, Ros Eeles, Louise Izatt, Carol Chu, Rosemarie Davidson, Diana Eccles, Kai-Ren Ong, Jackie Cook, Tim Rebbeck, Katherine L Nathanson, Susan M Domchek, Christian F Singer, Daphne Gschwantler-Kaulich, Anne-Catharina Dressler, Georg Pfeiler, Andrew K Godwin, Tuomas Heikkinen, Heli Nevanlinna, Bjarni A Agnarsson, Maria Adelaide Caligo, Håkan Olsson, Ulf Kristoffersson, Annelie Liljegren, Brita Arver, Per Karlsson, Beatrice Melin, Olga M Sinilnikova, Lesley McGuffog, Antonis C Antoniou, Georgia Chenevix-Trench, Amanda B Spurdle, Fergus J Couch.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Current attempts to identify genetic modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 associated risk have focused on a candidate gene approach, based on knowledge of gene functions, or the development of large genome-wide association studies. In this study, we evaluated 24 SNPs tagged to 14 candidate genes derived through a novel approach that analysed gene expression differences to prioritise candidate modifier genes for association studies.
METHODS: We successfully genotyped 24 SNPs in a cohort of up to 4,724 BRCA1 and 2,693 BRCA2 female mutation carriers from 15 study groups and assessed whether these variants were associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.
RESULTS: SNPs in five of the 14 candidate genes showed evidence of association with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers (P < 0.05). Notably, the minor alleles of two SNPs (rs7166081 and rs3825977) in high linkage disequilibrium (r² = 0.77), located at the SMAD3 locus (15q22), were each associated with increased breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers (relative risk = 1.25, 95% confidence interval = 1.07 to 1.45, P(trend) = 0.004; and relative risk = 1.20, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.40, P(trend) = 0.018).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the SMAD3 gene, which encodes a key regulatory protein in the transforming growth factor beta signalling pathway and is known to interact directly with BRCA2, may contribute to increased risk of breast cancer in BRCA2 mutation carriers. This finding suggests that genes with expression associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status are enriched for the presence of common genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk in these populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21114847      PMCID: PMC3046447          DOI: 10.1186/bcr2785

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res        ISSN: 1465-5411            Impact factor:   6.466


Introduction

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are at increased risk for developing breast cancer and/or ovarian cancer. Estimates of the cumulative risk of breast cancer by age 70 years range from 46% to 87% for BRCA1 mutation carriers and from 43% to 84% for BRCA2 mutation carriers [1-6]. Evidence from these studies suggests that breast cancer risks in mutation carriers are modified by environmental or genetic factors. A number of large studies, facilitated through the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/BRCA2 (CIMBA), have evaluated associations between genetic polymorphisms and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers [7-15]. The candidate gene (or candidate SNP) approach for identifying potential risk modifiers has been successfully used to identify a SNP in the 5' untranslated region of RAD51. Until recently, this finding has provided the most reliable evidence for a genetic modifier in BRCA2 mutation carriers [7]. A major disadvantage of using this approach to identify common genetic modifiers of breast cancer, however, is the limited understanding of mechanisms and pathways that underlie breast cancer development in families carrying mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. An alternative and powerful approach that can overcome such issues is the use of genome-wide association (GWA) studies to identify candidate SNPs. Analysis of breast cancer risk-associated SNPs identified by a large population-based GWA study of breast cancer [16] has shown that several of these SNPs also appear to modify risk in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers [8]. Not all of the breast cancer-associated SNPs assessed have been found to modify risk in carriers, however, and some of the risk associations are specific for BRCA2 mutation carriers only and not BRCA1 [8]. While GWA studies specifically addressing risk for BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 carriers are a more direct approach to identifying modifiers of these genes using an agnostic approach, GWA studies require large sample sizes to identify genetic modifiers with confidence. To address the problem of inadequate sample size, the CIMBA was established in 2005 to link clinical and epidemiological data from many groups from around the world [17]. The GWA approach is still limited, however, in that study designs involve predefined stringent selection criteria for which SNPs identified from the initial whole genome scan are going to be analysed in subsequent replication studies, a study design enforced by current genotyping costs. Moreover, GWA studies are often limited in information about exogenous risk factors, such as environmental exposures, which confounds any effort to explore the effect of environmental factors in modifying gene-disease associations. Global gene expression analysis as a means to agnostically identify candidate genetic modifiers has the potential to prioritise SNPs for candidate genes for association studies. This may be particularly valuable given recent observations that SNPs associated with risk of cancer in the general population appear to reside in noncoding regions that may modulate gene expression. An alternative approach to prioritising SNPs and candidate genes for association studies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers could rely on the selection of genes displaying associations with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status at the expression level in response to DNA damage. In a previous study, we used a novel combinatorial approach to identify a subset of 20 irradiation responsive genes as high-priority candidate BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 modifier genes [18]. The expression levels of these genes were shown to be associated with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation status in irradiated lymphoblastoid cell lines from female carriers when compared against irradiated lymphoblastoid cell lines from healthy controls. Furthermore, each of the genes were tagged with one or more SNPs shown to be associated with breast cancer risk from the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) Phase 1 Breast Cancer Whole Genome Association Scan [19,20]. In the present study we investigated the association of these polymorphisms, tagged to genes demonstrated in vitro to be involved in irradiation response, with risk of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Materials and methods

Study participants

Eligibility of study participants was restricted to female BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic mutation carriers who were aged 18 years or older. Fifteen clinic and population-based research studies from the USA, Canada, Australia, the UK and Europe submitted data to the present study (Table 1). Information collected included year of birth, age at diagnosis of breast cancer or ovarian cancer, age at last observation, family membership, ethnicity and information on bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy. All centres have obtained informed consent from study participants and the institutional review board approved protocols. In total, this study included up to 4,724 BRCA1 and 2,693 BRCA2 eligible female mutation carriers. Of the 2,193 and 1,189 unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, respectively, 972 (44.3%) and 589 (49.5%) had a relative that was in the affected group.
Table 1

Distribution of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers by study site

StudyCountrya BRCA1 BRCA2 Genotyping platform
HEBONThe Netherlands807308iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
EMBRACEUK841656iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
FCCCUSA8253iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
GC-HBOCGermany398163Golden Gatec
GEMOFrance/USA408226Golden Gatec
GeorgetownUSA2714iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
HEBCSFinland103104iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
ILUHIceland687iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
kConFabAustralia/New Zealand531427iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
MayoUSA227123iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
ModSQuaDUSA15891Golden Gatec
MUVAustria298126iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
PBCSItaly7643iPLEXb
SWE-BRCASweden489141iPLEXb; Golden Gatec
UPENNUSA273131iPLEXb; Golden Gatec

EMBRACE, Epidemiological Study of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers; FCCC, Fox Chase Cancer Center; HEBON, Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Research Group Netherlands; ILUH, Iceland Landspitali - University Hospital Study; kConFab, Kathleen Cunningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer; ModSQuaD, Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease; MUV, Medical University of Vienna; PBCS, Pisa Breast Cancer Study. aCoordinating centre. bSamples were genotyped at the Queensland Institute of Medical Research. cSamples were genotyped at the Mayo Clinic.

Distribution of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers by study site EMBRACE, Epidemiological Study of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers; FCCC, Fox Chase Cancer Center; HEBON, Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Research Group Netherlands; ILUH, Iceland Landspitali - University Hospital Study; kConFab, Kathleen Cunningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer; ModSQuaD, Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease; MUV, Medical University of Vienna; PBCS, Pisa Breast Cancer Study. aCoordinating centre. bSamples were genotyped at the Queensland Institute of Medical Research. cSamples were genotyped at the Mayo Clinic.

SNP selection and genotyping

In a previous report, we proposed 13 genes (ARHGEF2, HNRPDL, IL4R, JUND, LSM2, MAGED2, MLF2, MS4A1, SMAD3, STIP1, THEM2, TOMM40, VNN2) as candidate modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers, and 14 genes (ARHGEF2, JUND, MLF2, SMAD3, STIP1, THEM2, TOMM40, ABL1, ELMO1, EPM2AIP1, PER1, PLCG2, PLD3, SLC20A1) as candidate modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers (see Additional file 1) [18]. Thirty-seven SNPs denoted by CGEMS as being tagged to these genes were initially identified as showing some association with breast cancer risk (P < 0.05) (see Additional file 2). Of these 37 SNPs, a panel of 32 variants were selected after successful assay design and genotyped on two platforms, using the Illumina GoldenGate assay (Illumina Inc., San Diego, California, USA) and the Sequenom MassARRAY iPLEX platform (Sequenom, San Diego, CA, USA), as previously described [21,22]. The genotyping method used for each participating study is detailed in Table 1. Five SNPs tagged to five candidate genes (JUND, MAGED2, MLF2, MLH1, STIP1) had call rates <95% and were excluded from the analysis. The minor allele frequencies of three SNPs (rs2893535 - ELMO1, minor allele frequency = 0.033; rs2304911 - PER1, minor allele frequency = 0.043; and rs3802957 - MS4A1, minor allele frequency = 0.04) were considered too small for reliable analysis. The number of genes assessed for their associations with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers was therefore eight and 10, respectively.

Statistical methods

Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using weighted Cox proportional hazards models. Each subject was followed from birth to the earliest of breast cancer, bilateral mastectomy, ovarian cancer, last follow-up, or age 80. The phenotype of interest was time to breast cancer. Mutation-specific weights were calculated using the age distribution of affected and unaffected individuals according to the methods previously outlined by Antoniou and colleagues [23]. Analyses were stratified by year of birth, ethnicity, country of residence, study site, and mutation status. A robust variance estimate was used to account for relatedness amongst individuals. Primary SNP analyses assumed a log-additive relationship between the number of minor alleles carried by each individual and time to breast cancer. Wald P values below 0.05 were declared of interest. Secondary analyses were carried out in which RR estimates were separately generated for those carrying one and two copies of the minor allele versus those with two copies of the major allele. Between-study heterogeneity was examined in each SNP by including an interaction term between the genotype and study centre. Owing to the highly-selected nature of subjects, a number of sensitivity analyses were examined. To limit the effect of potential survival bias, subjects diagnosed more than 5 years prior to study enrolment were excluded (number affected analysed = 1,342 and 762 for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, respectively). Other models were examined that excluded women with ovarian cancer (number excluded = 491 and 151 BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, respectively). Finally, as risk of breast cancer is reduced after bilateral oophorectomy [24,25], analyses were carried out treating oophorectomy as a time-dependent covariate in the Cox proportional hazards models. All P values are two sided and analyses were carried out using R software [26].

Results and Discussion

A cohort of up to 4,724 BRCA1 and 2,693 BRCA2 female mutation carriers was used for the present study. Of these, 4,035 mutation carriers were diagnosed with breast cancer or ovarian cancer at the end of follow-up and 3,382 were censored as unaffected at a mean age of 44 years. The patient characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are presented in Table 2.
Table 2

Patient characteristics

CharacteristicBRCA1 mutation carriersBRCA2 mutation carriers


UnaffectedBreast cancerUnaffectedBreast cancer
Number of carriers2,1932,5311,1891,504
Length of follow-up (person-years)93,521102,87053,14766,764
Mean (SD) age at censure (years)43 (12.6)41 (9.4)45 (13.2)44 (9.7)
Age at censure, n (%)
 < 30 years344 (16%)252 (10%)144 (12%)52 (3%)
 30 to 39 years658 (30%)1060 (42%)343 (29%)474 (32%)
 40 to 49 years608 (28%)809 (32%)331 (28%)587 (39%)
 50 to 59 years374 (17%)310 (12%)215 (18%)273 (18%)
 60 to 69 years143 (6%)87 (3%)101 (8%)93 (6%)
 70+ years66 (3%)13 (1%)55 (5%)25 (2%)
Year of birth, n (%)
 Before 1949523 (24%)840 (33%)281 (24%)602 (40%)
 1949 to 1959508 (23%)816 (32%)307 (26%)518 (35%)
 1960 to 1968594 (27%)602 (24%)302 (25%)303 (20%)
 After 1968568 (26%)273 (11%)299 (25%)81 (5%)
Oophorectomy260 (12%)77 (3%)126 (11%)47 (3%)
Ethnicity, n (%)
 Caucasian2127 (97%)2446 (97%)1159 (97%)1464 (97%)
 Ashkenazi Jewish66 (3%)85 (3%)30 (3%)40 (3%)

SD, standard deviation.

Patient characteristics SD, standard deviation. The RR estimates for the association between SNP genotypes and risk of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are presented in Table 3 and Table 4 respectively. Of the 24 SNPs that passed quality control, the minor alleles of two SNPs were found to be associated with increased risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers (rs10242920 - ELMO1, P = 0.043; and rs480092 - LSM2, P = 0.015) and the minor alleles of three SNPs to be associated with increased risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers (rs1559949 - HNRPDL, P = 0.021; rs3825977 - SMAD3, P = 0.018; and rs7166081 - SMAD3, P = 0.004). The minor alleles of two SNPs, rs1559949 (HNRPDL) and rs3808814 (ABL1), were associated with decreased risk for BRCA1 (P = 0.022) and BRCA2 (P = 0.030) mutation carriers, respectively.
Table 3

Genotype distributions of 24 candidate modifier SNPs and hazard ratio estimates for BRCA1 mutation carriers

SNPGeneMinor alleleMAFHeterozygousHomozygousPer allele P trend



HR95% CIHR95% CIHR95% CI
rs7026988ABL1A0.121.080.88 to 1.341.610.82 to 3.151.130.93 to 1.360.212
rs3808814ABL1A0.090.900.72 to 1.140.650.22 to 1.910.890.72 to 1.100.284
rs1889532ARHGEF2G0.250.990.83 to 1.181.120.80 to 1.561.030.90 to 1.180.708
rs10242920ELMO1A0.241.060.89 to 1.271.611.12 to 2.321.161.00 to 1.330.043
rs6964474ELMO1C0.221.080.90 to 1.290.710.49 to 1.020.960.84 to 1.100.568
rs2541095ELMO1G0.121.030.84 to 1.271.120.48 to 2.631.040.86 to 1.260.683
rs6956864ELMO1G0.411.040.76 to 1.421.350.18 to 10.031.050.78 to 1.420.755
rs1559949HNRPDLG0.140.780.65 to 0.940.910.51 to 1.640.820.70 to 0.970.022
rs4285076HNRPDLA0.290.950.80 to 1.121.000.73 to 1.370.980.86 to 1.110.746
rs4787956IL4RG0.340.990.83 to 1.181.110.84 to 1.461.030.91 to 1.170.611
rs16976728IL4RA0.380.920.77 to 1.101.070.82 to 1.391.000.88 to 1.130.978
rs480092LSM2G0.161.251.04 to 1.511.300.81 to 2.081.211.04 to 1.420.015
rs2253820PER1A0.171.020.9 to 1.160.720.52 to 1.000.960.87 to 1.060.412
rs4888201PLCG2A0.161.100.91 to 1.341.390.77 to 2.511.130.95 to 1.330.168
rs10514519PLCG2A0.181.060.88 to 1.281.590.92 to 2.751.110.95 to 1.310.195
rs4997772PLCG2A0.391.130.95 to 1.351.070.84 to 1.371.050.94 to 1.180.377
rs3936112PLCG2A0.390.980.87 to 1.100.970.82 to 1.160.980.91 to 1.070.700
rs4254419PLD3A0.150.980.81 to 1.180.870.50 to 1.520.960.82 to 1.130.648
rs10758SLC20A1G0.260.980.82 to 1.170.950.68 to 1.330.980.85 to 1.120.729
rs3825977SMAD3A0.200.980.88 to 1.110.940.71 to 1.240.980.89 to 1.070.638
rs7166081SMAD3G0.240.980.87 to 1.111.030.80 to 1.331.000.91 to 1.100.995
rs3777663THEM2G0.241.020.86 to 1.221.170.84 to 1.631.050.92 to 1.200.453
rs2075642TOMM40A0.200.970.81 to 1.161.060.69 to 1.630.990.86 to 1.150.931
rs12211125VNN2/VNN3G0.090.960.83 to 1.111.190.73 to 1.940.990.87 to 1.120.882

MAF, minor allele frequency; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 4

Genotype distributions of 24 candidate modifier SNPs and hazard ratio estimates for BRCA2 mutation carriers

SNPGeneMinor alleleMAFHeterozygousHomozygousPer allele P trend



HR95% CIHR95% CIHR95% CI
rs7026988ABL1A0.120.960.73 to 1.260.930.41 to 2.100.960.76 to 1.200.713
rs3808814ABL1A0.090.720.51 to 1.020.500.17 to 1.420.710.53 to 0.970.030
rs1889532ARHGEF2G0.251.321.05 to 1.670.990.64 to 1.541.130.95 to 1.330.172
rs10242920ELMO1A0.241.010.79 to 1.300.860.52 to 1.430.970.80 to 1.170.747
rs6964474ELMO1C0.221.090.86 to 1.401.470.89 to 2.451.150.95 to 1.390.153
rs2541095ELMO1G0.121.040.8 to 1.350.720.27 to 1.941.000.78 to 1.260.971
rs6956864ELMO1G0.410.760.48 to 1.182.200.16 to 29.70.780.50 to 1.220.279
rs1559949HNRPDLG0.141.290.96 to 1.722.060.99 to 4.281.331.04 to 1.700.021
rs4285076HNRPDLA0.290.860.67 to 1.091.470.95 to 2.261.030.85 to 1.250.737
rs4787956IL4RG0.341.100.87 to 1.411.310.90 to 1.911.130.95 to 1.350.167
rs16976728IL4RA0.381.160.91 to 1.481.380.95 to 1.991.170.98 to 1.390.075
rs480092LSM2G0.160.920.72 to 1.181.090.55 to 2.160.960.78 to 1.190.735
rs2253820PER1A0.170.850.70 to 1.021.130.68 to 1.870.900.77 to 1.060.209
rs4888201PLCG2A0.160.980.75 to 1.271.160.54 to 2.521.010.80 to 1.270.964
rs10514519PLCG2A0.180.850.66 to 1.091.920.95 to 3.880.990.79 to 1.240.933
rs4997772PLCG2A0.391.210.95 to 1.551.260.89 to 1.781.140.97 to 1.340.107
rs3936112PLCG2A0.390.910.76 to 1.090.940.73 to 1.220.960.85 to 1.080.483
rs4254419PLD3A0.150.950.73 to 1.220.740.36 to 1.510.920.74 to 1.140.448
rs10758SLC20A1G0.261.120.88 to 1.421.110.67 to 1.841.080.90 to 1.300.388
rs3825977SMAD3A0.201.100.91 to 1.331.831.23 to 2.731.201.03 to 1.400.018
rs7166081SMAD3G0.241.170.97 to 1.421.741.21 to 2.491.251.07 to 1.450.004
rs3777663THEM2G0.240.950.75 to 1.211.110.69 to 1.790.990.82 to 1.200.945
rs2075642TOMM40A0.201.140.89 to 1.461.190.68 to 2.091.120.92 to 1.370.267
rs12211125VNN2 /VNN3G0.091.010.81 to 1.261.310.49 to 3.561.020.83 to 1.260.818

MAF, minor allele frequency; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Genotype distributions of 24 candidate modifier SNPs and hazard ratio estimates for BRCA1 mutation carriers MAF, minor allele frequency; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. Genotype distributions of 24 candidate modifier SNPs and hazard ratio estimates for BRCA2 mutation carriers MAF, minor allele frequency; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. All SNPs selected for the present study (see Additional file 2) had previously been reported to be at least marginally associated (P < 0.05) with breast cancer risk through the CGEMS Phase 1 Breast Cancer Whole Genome Association Scan [18], and to be tagged to a gene whose expression level was associated with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation status in irradiated lymphoblastoid cell lines [18]. The minor allele of four out of six SNPs shown here to be associated with risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (rs1559949 - HNRPDL; rs480092 - LSM2) or BRCA2 (rs3825977 and rs7166081 - SMAD3) had risk estimates for the homozygous genotype that were concordant with the odds ratio reported by the CGEMS study (Table 3 and 4, and Additional file 2). Furthermore, the expression of HNRPDL and LSM2 was associated with BRCA1 mutation status and the expression of SMAD3 was associated with BRCA2 mutation status [18]. The risk estimate of rs10242920 (ELMO1) was also concordant with the odds ratio determined by the CGEMS study; and although the expression of ELMO1 was not associated with BRCA1 mutation status at P < 0.001, there was an association with gene expression at P < 0.005 [18]. In contrast, the risk estimates of rs3808814 (ABL1) and rs1559949 (HNRPDL) in BRCA2 mutation carriers are not concordant with the odds ratio determined by the CGEMS study. Forest plots of study groups with 70 or more carriers and tests of heterogeneity are shown for two of the most significant SNPs (rs3825977, P-het = 0.619 and rs7166081, P-het = 0.218 at the SMAD3 locus), stratified by study site (Figure 1). The minor alleles of rs3825977 and rs7166081 are in high linkage disequilibrium (r2 = 0.77), which would be expected if their association with increased breast cancer risk is bona fide.
Figure 1

. BRCA2 plots of study group-specific relative risk (RR) for rs3825977 and rs7166081 at the SMAD3 locus. Study groups with 70 or more carriers and tests of heterogeneity are shown for (a) rs3825977 (overall RR (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 1.20 (1.03, 1.40), Ptrend = 0.018) and (b) rs7166081 (overall RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07, 1.45), Ptrend = 0.004). OR, odds ratio.

. BRCA2 plots of study group-specific relative risk (RR) for rs3825977 and rs7166081 at the SMAD3 locus. Study groups with 70 or more carriers and tests of heterogeneity are shown for (a) rs3825977 (overall RR (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 1.20 (1.03, 1.40), Ptrend = 0.018) and (b) rs7166081 (overall RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07, 1.45), Ptrend = 0.004). OR, odds ratio. Although further study is required to confirm whether genetic variation in SMAD3 plays a role in modifying risk of breast cancer, SMAD3 has been shown to interact with the BRCA2 protein - suggesting a possible mechanism through which SMAD3 may modify BRCA2 function [27]. Furthermore, SMAD3 is a critical regulatory factor of the transforming growth factor beta pathway, which is known to play a key role in the development of breast cancer as well as many other cancers [28,29]. In addition, a recent study comparing dense breast tissue (a known breast cancer risk factor) with nondense tissue identified reduced expression of SMAD3 to be associated with dense tissue, indirectly supporting a role of SMAD3 expression with breast cancer risk [29]. Choosing candidate BRCA1 and BRCA2 modifier genes from a novel combinatorial approach [18], we show that four SNPs tagged to three of the 14 candidate genes show an association with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We initiated the present study, however, with the expectation that SNPs in eight of the 14 genes may be associated with altered expression in BRCA1 mutation carriers, and 10 of the 14 genes with altered expression in BRCA2 carriers. We can thus argue that three out of 18 (17%) valid comparisons showed an association with risk. For either interpretation, the rate of observed association is greater than the one in 20 (5%) expected by chance. In addition, post hoc mining of the expression dataset showed that another SNP (rs10242920 - ELMO1) association that was consistent with the effect reported in the CGEMS dataset was also actually associated with altered expression in carriers, albeit with less significance (P = 0.005) than originally used for gene and SNP selection. These findings suggest that the combinatorial approach may be a useful method to prioritise candidate modifier genes for polymorphism association studies. It is notable that CIMBA GWA studies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are currently underway [30]. One might therefore anticipate that the combinatorial approach would provide even greater enrichment for prioritising SNPs from GWA studies that directly relate to the disease state under study. Further studies with larger cohort size are therefore warranted to assess the benefit of carrying out such an approach.

Conclusions

We have explored the value of using biological information embedded in gene expression data to prioritise candidate modifier genes for SNP association studies. Using this combinatorial approach we were able to demonstrate a threefold enrichment of genes that contain SNPs associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Most notable was the evidence that the SMAD3 gene, which encodes a key regulatory protein in the transforming growth factor beta signalling pathway, may contribute to increased risk of breast cancer in BRCA2 mutation carriers. These results suggest that the combinatorial approach may be a useful method to prioritise candidate modifier genes for polymorphism association studies.

Abbreviations

CGEMS: Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility; CIMBA: Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2; GWA: genome-wide association; RR: relative risk; SNP: single nucleotide polymorphism.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

LCW, ABS and FJC conceived and designed the study. LCW, GC-T, ABS and FJC coordinated the study, and LCW drafted the manuscript. ABS and FJC supervised the analysis and participated in manuscript writing. ZSF and VSP carried out the statistical analysis, and ZSF contributed to the manuscript writing. XW, RT, NML, JB, and XC processed samples and acquired data. DS-L, CT, SG, SM, DM, J-PF, CD, RKS, BW, CE, IS, HD, AM, FBH, MV, MJH, AMWvdO, MRN, MGEMA, CMA, CJvA, PD, MMG, QW, CIS, DFE, SP, MC, CTO, DF, PH, DGE, FL, RE, LI, CC, RD, DE, K-RO, JC, TR, KLN, SMD, CFS, DG-K, A-CD, GP, AKG, TH, HN, BAA, MAC, HO, UK, AL, BA, PK, BM, OMS, LM, ACA, GC-T and FJC provided samples and information on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers included in this study. SH and OMS provided assistance with mutation nomenclature and classifications. LM and ACA maintained the database of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Additional file 1

Supplementary Table S1. Genes predicted to modify risk. Genes predicted to modify risk in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation carriers by Walker and colleagues [18]. Click here for file

Additional file 2

Supplementary Table S2. List of 37 candidate . Each SNP listed was tagged to a gene and shown to be associated with breast cancer risk from the CGEMS Study version 1. Click here for file
  29 in total

1.  A weighted cohort approach for analysing factors modifying disease risks in carriers of high-risk susceptibility genes.

Authors:  Antonis C Antoniou; David E Goldgar; Nadine Andrieu; Jenny Chang-Claude; Richard Brohet; Matti A Rookus; Douglas F Easton
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.135

2.  RAD51 135G-->C modifies breast cancer risk among BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from a combined analysis of 19 studies.

Authors:  Antonis C Antoniou; Olga M Sinilnikova; Jacques Simard; Mélanie Léoné; Martine Dumont; Susan L Neuhausen; Jeffery P Struewing; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Laure Barjhoux; David J Hughes; Isabelle Coupier; Muriel Belotti; Christine Lasset; Valérie Bonadona; Yves-Jean Bignon; Timothy R Rebbeck; Theresa Wagner; Henry T Lynch; Susan M Domchek; Katherine L Nathanson; Judy E Garber; Jeffrey Weitzel; Steven A Narod; Gail Tomlinson; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Andrew Godwin; Claudine Isaacs; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Jacek Gronwald; Bohdan Górski; Tomasz Byrski; Tomasz Huzarski; Susan Peock; Margaret Cook; Caroline Baynes; Alexandra Murray; Mark Rogers; Peter A Daly; Huw Dorkins; Rita K Schmutzler; Beatrix Versmold; Christoph Engel; Alfons Meindl; Norbert Arnold; Dieter Niederacher; Helmut Deissler; Amanda B Spurdle; Xiaoqing Chen; Nicola Waddell; Nicole Cloonan; Tomas Kirchhoff; Kenneth Offit; Eitan Friedman; Bella Kaufmann; Yael Laitman; Gilli Galore; Gad Rennert; Flavio Lejbkowicz; Leon Raskin; Irene L Andrulis; Eduard Ilyushik; Hilmi Ozcelik; Peter Devilee; Maaike P G Vreeswijk; Mark H Greene; Sheila A Prindiville; Ana Osorio; Javier Benitez; Michal Zikan; Csilla I Szabo; Outi Kilpivaara; Heli Nevanlinna; Ute Hamann; Francine Durocher; Adalgeir Arason; Fergus J Couch; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2007-10-16       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  A genome-wide association study identifies alleles in FGFR2 associated with risk of sporadic postmenopausal breast cancer.

Authors:  David J Hunter; Peter Kraft; Kevin B Jacobs; David G Cox; Meredith Yeager; Susan E Hankinson; Sholom Wacholder; Zhaoming Wang; Robert Welch; Amy Hutchinson; Junwen Wang; Kai Yu; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Nick Orr; Walter C Willett; Graham A Colditz; Regina G Ziegler; Christine D Berg; Saundra S Buys; Catherine A McCarty; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Eugenia E Calle; Michael J Thun; Richard B Hayes; Margaret Tucker; Daniela S Gerhard; Joseph F Fraumeni; Robert N Hoover; Gilles Thomas; Stephen J Chanock
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2007-05-27       Impact factor: 38.330

4.  Prophylactic oophorectomy reduces breast cancer penetrance during prospective, long-term follow-up of BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Joan L Kramer; Isela A Velazquez; Bingshu E Chen; Philip S Rosenberg; Jeffery P Struewing; Mark H Greene
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Familial clustering of site-specific cancer risks associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in the Ashkenazi Jewish population.

Authors:  Sharon Simchoni; Eitan Friedman; Bella Kaufman; Ruth Gershoni-Baruch; Avi Orr-Urtreger; Inbal Kedar-Barnes; Ronit Shiri-Sverdlov; Efrat Dagan; Sigal Tsabari; Mordechai Shohat; Raphael Catane; Mary-Claire King; Amnon Lahad; Ephrat Levy-Lahad
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-02-28       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Characterization of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a large United States sample.

Authors:  Sining Chen; Edwin S Iversen; Tara Friebel; Dianne Finkelstein; Barbara L Weber; Andrea Eisen; Leif E Peterson; Joellen M Schildkraut; Claudine Isaacs; Beth N Peshkin; Camille Corio; Leoni Leondaridis; Gail Tomlinson; Debra Dutson; Rich Kerber; Christopher I Amos; Louise C Strong; Donald A Berry; David M Euhus; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Estimates of the gene frequency of BRCA1 and its contribution to breast and ovarian cancer incidence.

Authors:  D Ford; D F Easton; J Peto
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  AURKA F31I polymorphism and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a consortium of investigators of modifiers of BRCA1/2 study.

Authors:  Fergus J Couch; Olga Sinilnikova; Robert A Vierkant; V Shane Pankratz; Zachary S Fredericksen; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Isabelle Coupier; David Hughes; Agnès Hardouin; Pascaline Berthet; Susan Peock; Margaret Cook; Caroline Baynes; Shirley Hodgson; Patrick J Morrison; Mary E Porteous; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Jacek Gronwald; Amanda B Spurdle; Rita Schmutzler; Beatrix Versmold; Christoph Engel; Alfons Meindl; Christian Sutter; Jurgen Horst; Dieter Schaefer; Kenneth Offit; Tomas Kirchhoff; Irene L Andrulis; Eduard Ilyushik; Gordon Glendon; Peter Devilee; Maaike P G Vreeswijk; Hans F A Vasen; Ake Borg; Katja Backenhorn; Jeffery P Struewing; Mark H Greene; Susan L Neuhausen; Timothy R Rebbeck; Katherine Nathanson; Susan Domchek; Theresa Wagner; Judy E Garber; Csilla Szabo; Michal Zikan; Lenka Foretova; Janet E Olson; Thomas A Sellers; Noralane Lindor; Heli Nevanlinna; Johanna Tommiska; Kristiina Aittomaki; Ute Hamann; Muhammad U Rashid; Diana Torres; Jacques Simard; Francine Durocher; Frederic Guenard; Henry T Lynch; Claudine Isaacs; Jeffrey Weitzel; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Steven Narod; Mary B Daly; Andrew K Godwin; Gail Tomlinson; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci.

Authors:  Douglas F Easton; Karen A Pooley; Alison M Dunning; Paul D P Pharoah; Deborah Thompson; Dennis G Ballinger; Jeffery P Struewing; Jonathan Morrison; Helen Field; Robert Luben; Nicholas Wareham; Shahana Ahmed; Catherine S Healey; Richard Bowman; Kerstin B Meyer; Christopher A Haiman; Laurence K Kolonel; Brian E Henderson; Loic Le Marchand; Paul Brennan; Suleeporn Sangrajrang; Valerie Gaborieau; Fabrice Odefrey; Chen-Yang Shen; Pei-Ei Wu; Hui-Chun Wang; Diana Eccles; D Gareth Evans; Julian Peto; Olivia Fletcher; Nichola Johnson; Sheila Seal; Michael R Stratton; Nazneen Rahman; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Stig E Bojesen; Børge G Nordestgaard; Christen K Axelsson; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Louise Brinton; Stephen Chanock; Jolanta Lissowska; Beata Peplonska; Heli Nevanlinna; Rainer Fagerholm; Hannaleena Eerola; Daehee Kang; Keun-Young Yoo; Dong-Young Noh; Sei-Hyun Ahn; David J Hunter; Susan E Hankinson; David G Cox; Per Hall; Sara Wedren; Jianjun Liu; Yen-Ling Low; Natalia Bogdanova; Peter Schürmann; Thilo Dörk; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Catharina E Jacobi; Peter Devilee; Jan G M Klijn; Alice J Sigurdson; Michele M Doody; Bruce H Alexander; Jinghui Zhang; Angela Cox; Ian W Brock; Gordon MacPherson; Malcolm W R Reed; Fergus J Couch; Ellen L Goode; Janet E Olson; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Ans van den Ouweland; André Uitterlinden; Fernando Rivadeneira; Roger L Milne; Gloria Ribas; Anna Gonzalez-Neira; Javier Benitez; John L Hopper; Margaret McCredie; Melissa Southey; Graham G Giles; Chris Schroen; Christina Justenhoven; Hiltrud Brauch; Ute Hamann; Yon-Dschun Ko; Amanda B Spurdle; Jonathan Beesley; Xiaoqing Chen; Arto Mannermaa; Veli-Matti Kosma; Vesa Kataja; Jaana Hartikainen; Nicholas E Day; David R Cox; Bruce A J Ponder
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  An international initiative to identify genetic modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (CIMBA).

Authors:  Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Roger L Milne; Antonis C Antoniou; Fergus J Couch; Douglas F Easton; David E Goldgar
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Where genotype is not predictive of phenotype: towards an understanding of the molecular basis of reduced penetrance in human inherited disease.

Authors:  David N Cooper; Michael Krawczak; Constantin Polychronakos; Chris Tyler-Smith; Hildegard Kehrer-Sawatzki
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 2.  Inherited mutations in breast cancer genes--risk and response.

Authors:  Andrew Y Shuen; William D Foulkes
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 2.673

Review 3.  TGF-β signal transduction pathways and osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Guangju Zhai; Jules Doré; Proton Rahman
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2015-03-15       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Common variants of the BRCA1 wild-type allele modify the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers.

Authors:  David G Cox; Jacques Simard; Daniel Sinnett; Yosr Hamdi; Penny Soucy; Manon Ouimet; Laure Barjhoux; Carole Verny-Pierre; Lesley McGuffog; Sue Healey; Csilla Szabo; Mark H Greene; Phuong L Mai; Irene L Andrulis; Mads Thomassen; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Maria A Caligo; Eitan Friedman; Yael Laitman; Bella Kaufman; Shani S Paluch; Åke Borg; Per Karlsson; Marie Stenmark Askmalm; Gisela Barbany Bustinza; Katherine L Nathanson; Susan M Domchek; Timothy R Rebbeck; Javier Benítez; Ute Hamann; Matti A Rookus; Ans M W van den Ouweland; Margreet G E M Ausems; Cora M Aalfs; Christi J van Asperen; Peter Devilee; Hans J J P Gille; Susan Peock; Debra Frost; D Gareth Evans; Ros Eeles; Louise Izatt; Julian Adlard; Joan Paterson; Jacqueline Eason; Andrew K Godwin; Marie-Alice Remon; Virginie Moncoutier; Marion Gauthier-Villars; Christine Lasset; Sophie Giraud; Agnès Hardouin; Pascaline Berthet; Hagay Sobol; François Eisinger; Brigitte Bressac de Paillerets; Olivier Caron; Capucine Delnatte; David Goldgar; Alex Miron; Hilmi Ozcelik; Saundra Buys; Melissa C Southey; Mary Beth Terry; Christian F Singer; Anne-Catharina Dressler; Muy-Kheng Tea; Thomas V O Hansen; Oskar Johannsson; Marion Piedmonte; Gustavo C Rodriguez; Jack B Basil; Stephanie Blank; Amanda E Toland; Marco Montagna; Claudine Isaacs; Ignacio Blanco; Simon A Gayther; Kirsten B Moysich; Rita K Schmutzler; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Christoph Engel; Alfons Meindl; Nina Ditsch; Norbert Arnold; Dieter Niederacher; Christian Sutter; Dorothea Gadzicki; Britta Fiebig; Trinidad Caldes; Rachel Laframboise; Heli Nevanlinna; Xiaoqing Chen; Jonathan Beesley; Amanda B Spurdle; Susan L Neuhausen; Yuan C Ding; Fergus J Couch; Xianshu Wang; Paolo Peterlongo; Siranoush Manoukian; Loris Bernard; Paolo Radice; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Sylvie Mazoyer; Olga M Sinilnikova
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 6.150

5.  PC-TraFF: identification of potentially collaborating transcription factors using pointwise mutual information.

Authors:  Cornelia Meckbach; Rebecca Tacke; Xu Hua; Stephan Waack; Edgar Wingender; Mehmet Gültas
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  SMAD3 is associated with the total burden of radiographic osteoarthritis: the Chingford study.

Authors:  Erfan Aref-Eshghi; Yuhua Zhang; Deborah Hart; Ana M Valdes; Andrew Furey; Glynn Martin; Guang Sun; Proton Rahman; Nigel Arden; Tim D Spector; Guangju Zhai
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Genetic variants of cell cycle pathway genes predict disease-free survival of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Shun Liu; Tian-Bo Yang; Yue-Li Nan; An-Hua Li; Dong-Xiang Pan; Yang Xu; Shu Li; Ting Li; Xiao-Yun Zeng; Xiao-Qiang Qiu
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 4.452

8.  Full in-frame exon 3 skipping of BRCA2 confers high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Sandrine M Caputo; Mélanie Léone; Francesca Damiola; Asa Ehlen; Aura Carreira; Pascaline Gaidrat; Alexandra Martins; Rita D Brandão; Ana Peixoto; Ana Vega; Claude Houdayer; Capucine Delnatte; Myriam Bronner; Danièle Muller; Laurent Castera; Marine Guillaud-Bataille; Inge Søkilde; Nancy Uhrhammer; Sophie Demontety; Hélène Tubeuf; Gaïa Castelain; Uffe Birk Jensen; Ambre Petitalot; Sophie Krieger; Cédrick Lefol; Virginie Moncoutier; Nadia Boutry-Kryza; Henriette Roed Nielsen; Olga Sinilnikova; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Amanda B Spurdle; Manuel R Teixeira; Florence Coulet; Mads Thomassen; Etienne Rouleau
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2018-04-03

9.  Association between Gαi2 and ELMO1/Dock180 connects chemokine signalling with Rac activation and metastasis.

Authors:  Hongyan Li; Lei Yang; Hui Fu; Jianshe Yan; Ying Wang; Hua Guo; Xishan Hao; Xuehua Xu; Tian Jin; Ning Zhang
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 14.919

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.