OBJECTIVE: To validate six previously identified markers among men at increased risk of prostate cancer (African-American men and those with a family history of prostate cancer) enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment Program (PRAP), a prostate cancer screening study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria for PRAP include age 35-69 years with a family history of prostate cancer, African-American ethnicity regardless of family history, and known BRCA gene mutations. The genome-wide association study markers assessed included rs2736098 (5p15.33), rs10993994 (10q11), rs10788160 (10q26), rs11067228 (12q24), rs4430796 (17q12) and rs17632542 (19q13.33). Genotyping methods included either the Taqman(®) single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping assay (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) or pyrosequencing. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between individual markers and log-transformed baseline PSA levels, while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 707 participants (37% Caucasian, 63% African-American) with clinical and genotype data were included in the analysis. Rs10788160 (10q26) was strongly associated with PSA levels among Caucasian participants in the high-risk group (P < 0.01), with a 33.2% increase in PSA level with each A-allele carried. Furthermore, rs10993994 (10q11) was found to be associated with PSA level (P = 0.03) in Caucasian men in the high-risk group, with a 15% increase in PSA level with each T-allele carried. A PSA adjustment model based on allele carrier status at rs10788160 and rs10993994 was proposed, specific to high-risk Caucasian men. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation at 10q may be particularly important in personalizing the interpretation of PSA level for Caucasian men in the high-risk group. Such information may have clinical relevance in shared decision-making and individualized prostate cancer screening strategies for Caucasian men in the high-risk group, although further study is warranted.
OBJECTIVE: To validate six previously identified markers among men at increased risk of prostate cancer (African-American men and those with a family history of prostate cancer) enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment Program (PRAP), a prostate cancer screening study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria for PRAP include age 35-69 years with a family history of prostate cancer, African-American ethnicity regardless of family history, and known BRCA gene mutations. The genome-wide association study markers assessed included rs2736098 (5p15.33), rs10993994 (10q11), rs10788160 (10q26), rs11067228 (12q24), rs4430796 (17q12) and rs17632542 (19q13.33). Genotyping methods included either the Taqman(®) single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping assay (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) or pyrosequencing. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between individual markers and log-transformed baseline PSA levels, while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 707 participants (37% Caucasian, 63% African-American) with clinical and genotype data were included in the analysis. Rs10788160 (10q26) was strongly associated with PSA levels among Caucasian participants in the high-risk group (P < 0.01), with a 33.2% increase in PSA level with each A-allele carried. Furthermore, rs10993994 (10q11) was found to be associated with PSA level (P = 0.03) in Caucasian men in the high-risk group, with a 15% increase in PSA level with each T-allele carried. A PSA adjustment model based on allele carrier status at rs10788160 and rs10993994 was proposed, specific to high-risk Caucasian men. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation at 10q may be particularly important in personalizing the interpretation of PSA level for Caucasian men in the high-risk group. Such information may have clinical relevance in shared decision-making and individualized prostate cancer screening strategies for Caucasian men in the high-risk group, although further study is warranted.
Authors: E David Crawford; Robert Grubb; Amanda Black; Gerald L Andriole; Ming-Hui Chen; Grant Izmirlian; Christine D Berg; Anthony V D'Amico Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Monique J Roobol; Teuvo L J Tammela; Stefano Ciatto; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marcos Lujan; Hans Lilja; Marco Zappa; Louis J Denis; Franz Recker; Alvaro Páez; Liisa Määttänen; Chris H Bangma; Gunnar Aus; Sigrid Carlsson; Arnauld Villers; Xavier Rebillard; Theodorus van der Kwast; Paula M Kujala; Bert G Blijenberg; Ulf-Hakan Stenman; Andreas Huber; Kimmo Taari; Matti Hakama; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning; Anssi Auvinen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Brian T Helfand; Stacy Loeb; Qiaoyan Hu; Phillip R Cooper; Kimberly A Roehl; Barry B McGuire; Nikola A Baumann; William J Catalona Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: A Karim Kader; Jielin Sun; Sarah D Isaacs; Kathleen E Wiley; Guifang Yan; Seong-Tae Kim; Helen Fedor; Angelo M DeMarzo; Jonathan I Epstein; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin; Bruce Trock; S Lilly Zheng; Jianfeng Xu; William Isaacs Journal: Prostate Date: 2009-08-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Gilles Thomas; Kevin B Jacobs; Meredith Yeager; Peter Kraft; Sholom Wacholder; Nick Orr; Kai Yu; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Robert Welch; Amy Hutchinson; Andrew Crenshaw; Geraldine Cancel-Tassin; Brian J Staats; Zhaoming Wang; Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet; Jun Fang; Xiang Deng; Sonja I Berndt; Eugenia E Calle; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Michael J Thun; Carmen Rodriguez; Demetrius Albanes; Jarmo Virtamo; Stephanie Weinstein; Fredrick R Schumacher; Edward Giovannucci; Walter C Willett; Olivier Cussenot; Antoine Valeri; Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Margaret Tucker; Daniela S Gerhard; Joseph F Fraumeni; Robert Hoover; Richard B Hayes; David J Hunter; Stephen J Chanock Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2008-02-10 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Viorel Jinga; Irma Eva Csiki; Andrei Manolescu; Paul Iordache; Ioan Nicolae Mates; Daniel Radavoi; Stefan Rascu; Daniel Badescu; Paula Badea; Dana Mates Journal: J Cell Mol Med Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 5.310