Literature DB >> 26553438

Recurrent Coding Sequence Variation Explains Only A Small Fraction of the Genetic Architecture of Colorectal Cancer.

Maria N Timofeeva1, Ben Kinnersley2, Susan M Farrington1, Nicola Whiffin2, Claire Palles3, Victoria Svinti1, Amy Lloyd2, Maggie Gorman3, Li-Yin Ooi1, Fay Hosking2, Ella Barclay3, Lina Zgaga1, Sara Dobbins2, Lynn Martin3, Evropi Theodoratou1,4, Peter Broderick2, Albert Tenesa5,6, Claire Smillie1, Graeme Grimes6, Caroline Hayward6, Archie Campbell6,7, David Porteous6,7, Ian J Deary8, Sarah E Harris6,8, Emma L Northwood9, Jennifer H Barrett9, Gillian Smith10, Roland Wolf10, David Forman11, Hans Morreau12, Dina Ruano12, Carli Tops13, Juul Wijnen14, Melanie Schrumpf12, Arnoud Boot12, Hans F A Vasen15, Frederik J Hes13, Tom van Wezel12, Andre Franke16, Wolgang Lieb17, Clemens Schafmayer18, Jochen Hampe19, Stephan Buch19, Peter Propping20, Kari Hemminki21,22, Asta Försti21,22, Helga Westers23, Robert Hofstra23,24, Manuela Pinheiro25, Carla Pinto25, Manuel Teixeira25, Clara Ruiz-Ponte26, Ceres Fernández-Rozadilla26,3, Angel Carracedo26, Antoni Castells27, Sergi Castellví-Bel27, Harry Campbell1,4, D Timothy Bishop9, Ian P M Tomlinson3, Malcolm G Dunlop1, Richard S Houlston2.   

Abstract

Whilst common genetic variation in many non-coding genomic regulatory regions are known to impart risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), much of the heritability of CRC remains unexplained. To examine the role of recurrent coding sequence variation in CRC aetiology, we genotyped 12,638 CRCs cases and 29,045 controls from six European populations. Single-variant analysis identified a coding variant (rs3184504) in SH2B3 (12q24) associated with CRC risk (OR = 1.08, P = 3.9 × 10(-7)), and novel damaging coding variants in 3 genes previously tagged by GWAS efforts; rs16888728 (8q24) in UTP23 (OR = 1.15, P = 1.4 × 10(-7)); rs6580742 and rs12303082 (12q13) in FAM186A (OR = 1.11, P = 1.2 × 10(-7) and OR = 1.09, P = 7.4 × 10(-8)); rs1129406 (12q13) in ATF1 (OR = 1.11, P = 8.3 × 10(-9)), all reaching exome-wide significance levels. Gene based tests identified associations between CRC and PCDHGA genes (P < 2.90 × 10(-6)). We found an excess of rare, damaging variants in base-excision (P = 2.4 × 10(-4)) and DNA mismatch repair genes (P = 6.1 × 10(-4)) consistent with a recessive mode of inheritance. This study comprehensively explores the contribution of coding sequence variation to CRC risk, identifying associations with coding variation in 4 genes and PCDHG gene cluster and several candidate recessive alleles. However, these findings suggest that recurrent, low-frequency coding variants account for a minority of the unexplained heritability of CRC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26553438      PMCID: PMC4639776          DOI: 10.1038/srep16286

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Heritable factors are thought to contribute to around 35% of the variation in risk of developing colorectal Cancer (CRC)123. High-penetrance mutations responsible for Mendelian disorders such as Lynch Syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis and MUTYH associated polyposis have been shown to account for around 5% of all CRC. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have vindicated the notion that common genetic variants also contribute to CRC risk. Over 25 risk SNPs identified through GWAS456789101112131415 are collectively responsible for only around 1% of CRC heritability3 and so much of the genetic contribution to CRC risk currently remains enigmatic. It has been proposed that low frequency variants in coding regions, may have substantial effects on risk and so may explain an appreciable proportion of the heritability of complex disease16. Conventional GWAS arrays have been sub-optimally configured to genotype such low frequency recurrent variation, whilst large-scale sequencing has been constrained by cost and data analysis bottlenecks. Exome sequencing studies in multiple populations have enabled the assembly of catalogues of well-characterised single nucleotide variants within the coding sequence of genes. Genotyping arrays have been formatted into “exon” arrays specifically designed to interrogate recurrent genetic variation with putative impact on gene function. We set out to test the hypothesis that variation within gene coding sequences is associated with CRC risk, by making use of the recently introduced Illumina Exon array.

Results

Post QC exome-wide analysis was based on 8,100 CRC cases and 21,820 controls from the six case-control series (Supplementary Tables 1 and 2). We also made use of genotypes for ~10,000 SNPs (~54% variants are non-synonymous) that were included in our previously published GWASs810, thus increasing power and providing additional exome array variant data on 4538 cases and 7225 controls (Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Table 3). Prior to the meta-analysis, we assessed the adequacy of the case-control matching and possibility of differential genotyping of cases and controls in individual studies using Quantile-Quantile (Q-Q) plots of test statistics (Supplementary Figure 6). Using data from the above 9 case-control series, we derived for each SNP joint odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs) in a meta-analysis under a fixed-effects model and determined the associated P values. Overall 72,162 non-monomorphic post-QC variants observed in at least 2 studies contributed to the combined meta-analysis totalling 12,638 cases and 29,046 controls (Supplementary Table 1). Of these variants, 29,117 variants were rare (MAF < 1%) and 32,809 variants exhibited MAF < 5%. We found no appreciable inflation of test statistics for the meta-analysis as a whole, λ90%bottom = 0.98, thereby excluding significant differential genotyping or cryptic population substructure (See Q-Q plot in Supplementary Figure 7)81013.

Single variant analysis

17 variants showed evidence for an association with CRC which exceeded Bonferroni-corrected exome-wide threshold of statistical significance (Table 1, Supplementary Table 4, Supplementary Figure 7), 4 of these 17 variants were non-synonymous missense variants: (rs3184504 (p.Trp263Arg) in SH2B3 (12q24; OR = 1.08, P = 3.9 × 10−7, effect allele frequency (EAF) = 0.52); rs16888728 (p.Pro215Gln) in UTP23 (8q24; OR = 1.15, P = 1.4 × 10−7, EAF = 0.10); two variants in FAM186A (12q13) - rs6580742 (p.Met2193Ile, OR = 1.11, P = 1.2 × 10−7, EAF = 0.19) and rs12303082 (p.Lys187Gln, OR = 1.09, P = 7.4 × 10−8, EAF = 0.36)). Another variant within 12q13 loci rs1129406 (12q13; OR = 1.11 P = 8.3 × 10−9, EAF = 0.41) is located within a splice region of ATF1. The rs3184504 association highlights a novel CRC risk locus (Table 1, Supplementary Figure 8). The p.Trp263Arg amino acid change resides in exon 3 of the SH2B adaptor protein and is predicted to be benign and tolerated by PolyPhen17 and SIFT18. Though predicted to be located within a transcription factor binding site (POLR2A) in lymphoblastoid, leukaemia and glioblastoma cell lines, it seems unlikely affect binding according to RegulomeDB (score 3a)19 or influence expression of SH2B3 in lymphoblastoid cell lines2021 and other tissues2223. Conditional analysis showed that rs3184504 genotype was sufficient to explain all of the effect at the 12q24 risk locus (Supplementary Table 5).
Table 1

Results of meta-analysis for variants reaching exome-wide level of significance (4 × 10-7) under a fixed effects model.

SNP rsIDGeneAnnotationCHRBPRisk AlleleReference AlleleEAF(cases/controls)N studiesN casesN controlsORP valueP value Bonferroni adjusted
rs1129406ATF1coding-synon1251203371AG0.43/ 0.4064730126031.118.30 × 10−97.44 × 10−04
rs12303082FAM186Amissense1250754563AC037/0.35910207198861.097.40 × 10−86.63 × 10−03
rs6580742FAM186Amissense1250727811AG0.20/0.19912539292081.111.20 × 10−70.01
rs16888728UTP23missense8117783975AG0.11/0.10810621267791.151.40 × 10−70.01
rs3184504SH2B3missense12111884608GA0.53/0.51912530291971.083.90 × 10−70.03

EAF – effect allele frequency.

The 4 other novel SNPs rs16888728, rs6580742, rs12303082 and rs1129406 map to the previously described 8q24.111224 and 12q13.12 loci10 (Table 1). rs16888728 is located within exon 3 of UTP23 (8q23.3, 117783975, p.Pro215Gln) and is in moderate linkage disequilibrium (LD) with rs16892766 (8q23.3, 117630683)24 (D’ = 0.63, r2 = 0.30). Mutual adjustment was unable to distinguish the effects of rs16888728 on CRC risk from the previously described GWAS association, suggesting rs16892766 to be a primary signal (rs16888728, ORcond = 0.99, Pcond = 0.83; rs16892766, ORcond = 1.27, Pcond = 5.3 × 10−10) (Supplementary Table 6). Detailed analysis of the 12q13 locus encompassing coding variants in ATF1 and FAM186A showed that three new variants are within a region of fairly extensive linkage disequilibrium (LD) (r2 = 0.31–0.68, D’ = 0.92–1) and in moderate LD with rs11169552, a previously identified through GWAS10 CRC risk locus (r2 = 0.08 − 0.24, D’ = 0.95–0.99). Both rs6580742 and rs12303082 are missense variants located within the exon 1 (rs6580742, chr12:50727811, p.Met2193Ile) and exon 3 (rs12303082, chr12:50754563, p.Lys187Gln) of FAM186A. Strongest signal at the locus (rs1129406) is a synonymous coding variant in ATF1 located within the splice region of gene, though it is unclear if the normal splicing of the gene is affected by the variant. rs6580742 is located within DNaseI hypersensitivity cluster and in eQTL with DIP2B and KIAA1463 expression in lymphoblastoid cell lines192526 and cis-eQTL with ATF1 expression in esophagus mucosa, subcutaneous adipose tissue, tibial artery2223. It is likely to affect binding according to RegulomeDB (score 1f)1927. Conditional analyses indicate that all the association signals, including previously identified rs1116955210 (OR = 1.08, P = 2.55 × 10−5, ORcond = 1.02, Pcond = 0.35,EAF = 0.73), are explained by rs1129406, the splice region variant in ATF1 (Supplementary Table 7). The remaining 10 SNPs in non-coding regions had been identified through our previous GWAS studies of CRC101113282930. We subsequently applied conditional analysis to interrogate all CRC risk loci highlighted by the current study but found no evidence of multiple signals at 1q41, 8q24.21, 15q13.3, 18q21.1, 19q13.11, 20p12.3 and 20q13.33 (Supplementary Tables 8–14). We further explored if rs1129406 (ATF1, 12q13), rs12303082 (FAM186A, 12q13), rs6580742 (FAM186A, 12q13), rs16888728 (UTP23, 8q24) and rs3184504 (SH2B3, 12q24) genotypes affect the CRC risk differentially by sex, age at diagnosis, tumor site, stage and MSI status (Supplementary Table 15). Intriguingly, we found that rs16888728 is significantly associated with gender in case-only analysis (OR = 1.21, P = 5.6 × −4) with no effect on CRC risk in males in case-control analysis (OR = 1.28, P = 5 × 10−8 in women and OR = 1.06 and P = 0.14 in men).

Gene-based analysis

Following on from these single variant analyses we conducted a gene-based analysis for rare (MAF < 1%) and low-frequency (MAF < 5%) variants observed in at least two cohorts (Supplementary Figure 9, Table 2). Meta-analysis of SKAT-O results showed some evidence of inflation (λ = 1.45 in analysis for low –frequency variants). Among the genes showing evidence of association in low-frequency variants analysis were tandemly located genes from protocadherin gamma gene cluster (PCDHGA3, PCDHGA2, PCDHGA1, PCDHGA4, PCDHGB1, 5q31.3, P < 2.9 × 10−6). The details of the SNPs contributing to PCDHG associations are given in Supplementary Table 16. None of the genes reached significance in rare – variant analysis.
Table 2

Meta-analysis of gene-based (SKAT-O) tests.

SetIDGeneN of variants #DescriptionChrbandp.value
(A) low frequency (MAF < 5%) variants (n = 16,585)
 ENSG00000254245PCDHGA389protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 35q31.37.29E-07
 ENSG00000081853PCDHGA290protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 25q31.37.49E-07
 ENSG00000204956PCDHGA191protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 15q31.37.86E-07
 ENSG00000254221PCDHGB182protocadherin gamma subfamily B, 15q31.31.43E-06
 ENSG00000262576PCDHGA479protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 45q31.32.91E-06
(B) High and Moderate low frequency (MAF < 5%) variants (n = 16,081)
 ENSG00000254245PCDHGA383protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 35q31.32.59E-06
 ENSG00000081853PCDHGA284protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 25q31.32.79E-06
 ENSG00000204956PCDHGA185protocadherin gamma subfamily A, 15q31.32.96E-06

Top significant results for SKAT-O gene-based test for different subsets. We used Bonferroni correction to identify Exome-Wide level of significance for each of the subgroup separately. Only variants, which were observed in at least two independant studies, were included in the analysis. Genes with less than 2 variants per gene were exluded. Variants were defined High and Moderate accordind to classification adapted by SnpEff. # N of variants is based by the number of SNPs located within the genes and may vary by study, e.g. in case of monomorphic alleles.

Gene-ontology (GO) enrichment analysis implicated homophilic cell adhesion genes in CRC development (Supplementary Table 17).

Search for candidate high-penetrance CRC alleles

Next, we searched for rare high penetrance CRC variants by analysis of rare damaging variants present in more than 3 CRC cases, but absent from controls. In the analysis of dominant alleles, we observed truncating variants in NWD1, CD1A, ZNF594, DNAH9, ZNF418, ABTB1 and HIST1H3A and two missense variants in GCN1L1 (Supplementary Table 18). We also assessed the contribution of rare recessive alleles present in >3 cases, but absent in controls (Supplementary Table 18). Notable among these homozygotes were stop codon (p.Tyr90*) in the base excision repair gene, NTHL1, as well as homozygous missense variants in the DNA mismatch-excision repair gene, PMS1 (p.Thr75Ile) (Supplementary Figure 10). Overall we saw an excess of rare homozygous variants in base excision repair (16/8100 cases vs. 10/21820 controls, OR = 4.31; P = 2.4 × 10−4) and mismatch repair genes (11/8100 cases vs. 5/21820 controls, OR = 5.93, P = 6.1 × 10−4) in cases (Supplementary Table 19). We also sought evidence of compound heterozygosity in cases and identified two damaging NOTCH2 variants and three damaging variants in DNAJC17 (DnaJ (Hsp40) homolog, subfamily C, member 17) that were observed to be present in heterozygous state at least twice in 2 and more cases, but absent in controls (Supplementary Table 20). NOTCH2 is regulated by Wnt signalling and known to have lower expression in colorectal and ovarian cancer31.

Discussion

We have identified coding variation in 4 genes (SH2B3, UTP23, FAM186A, ATF1) and PCDHG gene cluster that contribute to the risk of developing CRC. Three of the 4 genes with new coding variants influencing CRC risk had been identified by previous GWAS SNPs101224. Novel association between the coding variant (rs3184504) in the SH2B3 gene has been described during the process of preparation and review of this manuscript in an independent meta-analysis32. Perhaps the most interesting finding of this well-powered study is the observation that very few recurrent coding sequence variants contribute to CRC risk, and certainly not with major effect size (OR > 2.5). The association between CRC risk and the adaptor protein, SH2B3, is interesting, since rs3184504 results in a predicted benign non-synonymous amino acid substitution (p.Trp263Arg) within the plekstrin homology domain of SH2B3. SH2B3 is induced upon JAK-STAT3 phosphorylation and is expressed at high levels in haematopoietic cells, but only at low levels in the normal colon. The protein is a regulator of cytokine signals at the cell surface through tyrosine kinase signalling cascades and is thought to act as a negative regulator of such signals at the cell surface to impart an anti-proliferative effect. A consanguineous family has been reported which segregates a germline frameshift mutation in the Plekstrin homology domain of SH2B3. Homozygous individuals developed various autoimmune phenotypes and one sibling developed acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) as an infant33. Somatic SH2B3 mutations have also been identified in 3% of ALL, suggesting that SH2B3 loss plays a role in initiation and progression of human leukaemia through dysregulated cytokine signalling. Interrogation of TCGA and Broad Institute sequence data from colorectal adenocarcinomas343536 did not identify an excess of somatic mutations in SH2B3 (0.69% of samples carry deleterious mutations or copy number variations), suggesting that SH2B3 mutations are not drivers in CRC progression33. Genetic variation at the SH2B3 gene locus has been associated with various autoimmune related disorders including hepatitis37, rheumatoid arthritis38, hypothyroidism39, type 1 diabetes40, vitiligo41, rheumatoid arthritis and coeliac syndrome42, suggesting that SH2B3 dysfunction may be involved in mediating disordered immune function and thereby play a role in cancer susceptibility. Interestingly, SH2B3 is over-expressed in ovarian tumour cells with evidence for a role in activating signal transduction43. SH2B3 expression status may have paradoxical effects in cancer, dependent on cellular context. The variant in UTP23 (rs16888728) also exerts a modest effect on CRC risk. The UTP23 transcript is expressed at modest levels in many tissue types. It has sequence homology to a yeast protein involved in ribosomal RNA processing and ribosome biogenesis. As such, it may be involved in alternative splicing, although very little is known about the functional role of the human protein. The coding variant (rs16888728) is located within exon 3 of UTP23 and results in a non-conserved amino acid substitution (p.Pro215Gln, GERP score = −0.543). Conditional analysis was unable to distinguish the effects of rs16888728 on CRC risk from that of the previously described24 GWAS association (rs16892766). Interrogation of tumour sequence databases reveals no significant excess of mutations in CRC (<1% prevalence)343536. However, UTP23 is amplified in ~5% of CRC tumours3536 with significant correlation between UTP1 mRNA expression and copy number variation. The SNP rs1129406, a splice site variant in ATF1, appears to explain the association signal at the 12q13 locus, including that of a previous signal identified by GWAS (rs11169552)10. ATF1 is a transcription factor that, when phosphorylated, induces transcriptional transactivation of target genes. Fusion of ATF1 with the Ewing’s Sarcoma gene, or with FUS, results in continuous signaling and sarcomatous tumour formation. Common variation has not been associated with other cancers, however significant cis-eQTL with ATF1 was detected for this variant in esophagus mucosa, subcutaneous adipose tissue and tibial artery2223. Whilst there are no excess of somatic mutations in CRC tissue in TCGA or Broad data, rs1129406 may be the causative variant that explains the previous GWAS signal. The relationship of FAM186A to CRC risk is somewhat opaque, as very little is known about this gene. FAM186A appears to be a protein coding gene, rather than a lncRNA. Hence we cannot exclude the possibility that the effect is mediated through regulatory effects. The gene-based test, SKAT-O, highlighted several genes from protocadherin gamma (PCDHG) gene cluster on chromosome 5 exhibiting a composite excess of coding variants and thereby indicating the gene is associated with CRC risk. Somatic genomic missense and nonsense mutations in one of the identified genes are present in 11.8% of CRC cases and up to 31% of all skin cuteneous melanomas (according to The Cancer Genome Atlas data)35. PCDHG gene cluster encodes 22 genes divided into 3 subfamily (A,B and C) based on sequence similarities with multiple transcripts generated by alternative splicing44. PCDH expression is observed in colon and long range epigenetic silencing of PCDH cluster region has been described in Wilm’s tumours45, breast cancers46 and colorectal adenomas and carcinomas47. Hence, PCDH genes play role of tumour suppressor and silencing mutations might be expected to have tumour-promoting effects. Whilst PCDHG cluster genes are strong candidates based on the analysis presented in this study, further work is required to confirm the role of these genes in cancer predisposition. The identification of damaging alleles acting as rare recessive traits in genes that participate in DNA repair, with known paradigms in CRC susceptibility, such as NTHL1 (p.Tyr90*) and PMS1 (p.Thr75Ile) clearly require further study as these represent strong candidate recessive alleles. Recently NTHL1 loss-of-function germline mutation has been described in families with adenomatous polyposis and progression to CRC inherited in recessive mode48, thus suggesting that the observed association is real and our search for rare damaging alleles is a successful approach to identify candidate variants. The observed excess of rare damaging variants in base-excision and mismatch repair genes suggests that the clinical importance of moderately penetrant, disease-causing, variants in DNA repair genes may be underestimated. However, further studies will require even larger sample sizes, given the rarity of the alleles, unless sequencing can identify new alleles in addition to those catalogued here. Indeed, many of the genes with damaging variants represent strong candidates for validation in exome and whole genome sequencing efforts. Given the expectation that uncommon functional variation might be associated with CRC risk, with larger effect size than common variation, it is surprising that we have identified so few new coding sequence variants, and that all of these exert modest effect sizes (OR 1.08–1.15). In a linear-mixed model analysis (Supplementary Material), we estimated that the genetic variants identified though previous GWAS and significant in our meta-analysis explain approximately 1.5 ± 0.7% of the total phenotypic variance on the liability scale, while the newly identified variants account for only 0.4% of the total variance. The Infinium Human Exome BeadChip 12v1.0 or 12v1.1 (Illumina Inc.) array was configured to identify coding sequence variants most likely to have functional consequences. Despite of its attractiveness as a cheap alternative to exome sequencing, exome array has some limitations and is not able to offer complete whole exome coverage of all possible functional variants and indels. Importantly, exome array was designed based on exome sequencing of 12,000 samples and enriched for multiple outcomes such as cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, autism and cancer49, which may not be representative of our cohorts. There were some differences in the genotyping quality between various versions of arrays used in the analyses and many variants did not pass stringent quality control criteria. Around 70,000 SNPs were non-monomorphic in European populations, present in at least two studies and passed our QC measures. The focus on genetic variants with potential detrimental functional consequences should also enhance the a priori likelihood of pathogenicity. Though limited in detection of indels with only 136 present on the chip, the study was well powered to detect plausible effect sizes and allele frequencies (Supplementary Figure 11). Indeed, the study size had 80% power to detect an OR > 3 provided the MAF was >0.001 and an OR odds >1.8 if the MAF was 0.005. Whilst larger studies and/or meta-analysis might identify further coding variants with functional effects, the paucity of findings of recurrent low frequency coding variation impacting on CRC risk is intriguing. Because the causative gene mutations have been characterised for almost all dominant high penetrance CRC families, it seems unlikely that rare recurrent alleles in European populations have yet to be identified with large effects (OR > 5), apart from private mutations or recessive traits that are unlikely to be discovered through designed commercial arrays. Hence, population-specific custom exome arrays as well exome and genome sequencing of trios and families may be a way forward to identify recurrent rare genetic variation of moderate effect of risk and private mutations.

Materials and Methods

Study populations

The study was based on six independent case control series from European populations including Scotland (3,616 cases and 10,312 controls), England (4,558 cases and 11,249 controls), Germany (284 cases and 1,100 controls), Holland (480 cases and 480 controls), Spain (300 cases and 300 controls) and Portugal (200 cases and 200 controls). Details regarding these participating studies are described in the Supplementary Data (available online). All cases had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (codes 153 or 154 International Classification of Diseases (ICD), 9th revision or ICD10 C18, C19 or C20 codes). The study was undertaken at participating centres with written informed consent in accordance with respective Institutional Review Boards (IRB)/Ethics Committees. To enhance our power we made use of previously published GWASs810 thus providing ~10.000 exome array variant data on 3,549 cases and 3,698 controls from UK1 and UK2 studies, 3,158 cases and 3,073 controls from Scotland Phase1, Scotland Phase2 and Scotland Phase3, and 1,794 cases and 2,686 controls from the VQ58 study813 (Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Tables 2, 3). After quality control and exclusion of expected and unexpected duplicates between studies we ended up with exome array variant data on 3,033 cases and 3,690 controls from UK1 and UK2 studies, 556 cases and 2,997 controls from Scotland Phase1, Scotland Phase2 and Scotland Phase3, and 949 cases and 538 controls from the VQ58 study813. Study details, details of genotyping, quality control procedures, sample and SNPs exclusion for these GWAS-focussed studies have been published previously8 (Supplementary Data, Supplementary Tables 2, 3).

Exome Array Genotyping and Quality Control

DNA was extracted from EDTA-venous blood samples using standard methodologies at each centre. Genotyping was performed using the Infinium Human Exome BeadChip 12v1.0 or 12v1.1 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA), with genotype calling using Illumina GenCall for HumanExome-12v1.0 and HumanExome-12v1.1 versions called separately. Generation Scotland controls and a subset of the cases from the SOCCS study were genotyped using OmniExpressExome BeadChip 8v1.1 or 8v1.250 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA). A summary of the array SNP content5152 and the respective SNP inventory53 have been provided previously. Standard quality procedure were applied, with further details of sample and probe exclusion in Supplementary Material and Supplementary Table 2. We compared MAF and genotyping call genotyping call rates between different version of arrays used in the current study and excluded all variants that showed some evidence of differences (Supplementary Figures 1,3). Additionally, we compared allele frequency to the 1000G data and UK exome array consortium (Supplementary Figure 2). Following standard quality-assurance and quality control measures this collaborative initiative provided information on 12,638 CRCs cases and 29,045 controls (Supplementary Table 1).

Statistical analysis

We designed the study according to an estimate of the sample size required to detect plausible effect sizes (OR = 1.5–5.0) at various rare allele frequencies (>0.001). Following completion of the study and all QC measures, we re-estimated statistical power for a given sample size using QUANTO version 1.2.454 for the main effect of genetic variant and the log-additive model of inheritance stipulating a P-value of 5.5 × 10−7, which corresponds to Bonferroni-corrected exome-wide level of significance. The association between individual variants and risk of CRC was evaluated in initial data analysis using unconditional logistic regression under a log-additive model of inheritance for each study separately. To examine whether associations at each identified locus were independent, we conducted conditional analysis by controlling for allelic dosage for the most significantly associated SNP at the locus. We subsequently applied conditional analysis to interrogate following CRC risk loci highlighted by the current study: 1q41 controlling for rs6687758, 8q23.3 controlling for rs16892766 and/or rs16888728, 8q24.21 controlling for rs10505477, rs6983267 and/or rs7014346, 11q32.1 controlling for rs3802842, 12q13.12 controlling for rs6580742, rs12303082 and rs1129406, 12q24.12 controlling for rs3184504, 14q22.2 controlling for rs4444235, 15q13.3 controlling for rs4779584, 18q21.1 controlling for rs4939827, 19q13.11 controlling for rs10411210, 20p12.3 controlling for rs961253 and 20q13.33 controlling for rs4925386. Individual study effect estimates (Odds ratios (OR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) derived from logistic regression were combined in a meta-analysis. We used a fixed effect inverse variance weighting model for meta-analysis to maximize discovery power of the current study55. Only non-monomorphic variants observed in at least two studies were included in the meta-analysis. We tested for over-dispersion of P-values in the meta-analysis by generating quantile-quantile (QQ) plots and deriving an inflation factor (λ). Cochran’s Q statistic was used to test for heterogeneity and the I2 statistic to quantify the proportion of the total variation due to heterogeneity. I2 values ≥ 75% were considered to indicate excessive heterogeneity56 and variants displaying I values > 75% in were excluded from further analysis. Taking all the above measures into account, 72,162 SNPs remained in the analysis, equating to a Bonferroni-corrected exome-wide threshold of statistical significance of 5.55 × 10−7. This is conservative given the likely linkage disequilibrium between some variants. We further examined top variants and excluded those that showed obvious problems with clustering and differences in clustering between versions of genotyping platforms in our analysis. This included monomorphic rs1058065 (exm2255298). Association by sex, age, stage (invasive, non-invasive), MSI status and tumour site (rectal [ICD9:154], colonic [ICD9:153]) for the top new variants were further explored using ordered logistic regression in case-only analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Gene based and pathway analysis

To explore the effects of more than one variant in the same gene on CRC risk, we used the small-sample-adjusted unified test, SKAT-O57 with default weight on rare variants. All variants observed in at least two studies contributed to the SKAT-O results. We performed analyses for rare (MAF > 1%) and low frequency variants (MAF below 5%) including all and only High and Moderate effects as annotated by SnpEff  58. Due to the different number of variants in each individual study we performed SKAT-O test separately for each individual study and combined summary statistics from individual SKAT results in a meta-analysis using “MetaSKAT” package in R59 Similarly to single-variant analysis we tested for over-dispersion of P-values by generating QQ plots and deriving an inflation factor (λ). To account for multiple testing in these gene-based tests, we set the significance threshold to be P < 2 × 10−6 to reflect Bonferroni correction for the 23,280 genes examined. These 23,280 genes were selected on the base of the presence of 2 and more variants per gene and unique mapping coordinates. We further examined top genes and excluded those that were driven by single variant with the differences in clustering between versions of genotyping platforms in our analysis. This included monomorphic rs1058065 (EIF2B4) . Further, we investigated variants contributing to the gene-based test. To determine whether genes identified in SKAT-O were enriched for particular molecular pathways, we performed a gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis on a sorted by p value list of genes , using Gene Ontology enRIchment anaLysis and visuaLizAtion tool (GOrilla)6061. We considered the possibility that rare damaging variants represented on the exome array might confer high-penetrance susceptibility to CRC and conducted exploratory data analysis. We reasoned on the basis of pre-existing empiric data that any dominant alleles would be likely to have frequencies of <0.1%, whereas recessive alleles would have frequencies of <2% in controls. Dominant alleles were filtered from the entire variant set as follows: [1] predicted not to be benign/tolerated by both SIFT18 and PolyPhen217 or nonsense variants; [2] excluded probable miscalled SNPs through visual inspection of genotyping clusters; [3] absent in controls to ensure inclusion of potentially high penetrance risk alleles. Recessive alleles were filtered from the entire variant set as follows: [1] predicted not benign or tolerated by both SIFT18 and PolyPhen217; [2] excluded probable miscalled SNPs through visual inspection of genotyping; [3] homozygotes absent in controls to ensure inclusion of potentially high penetrance risk alleles; [4] minor allele frequency ≤ 0.02 in controls. We evaluated effect of rare damaging variants under dominant or recessive model of inheritance using Fisher’s exact test in a pooled analysis. Due to the limited number of rare damaging variants on traditional GWAS platforms, we included in the analysis case-control series genotyped using Exome Array only (8100 cases/21820 controls). We also looked for evidence of an excess of compound heterozygosity for rare damaging variants in cases compared to controls. The compound heterozygous list was filtered from the entire set of heterozygous variants as follows: (1) excluded probable miscalled SNPs through visual inspection of genotyping clusters, [2] predicted not to be benign/tolerated by both SIFT18 and PolyPhen217, (3) number of rare damaging heterozygotes per gene in controls ≤ 1, (4) minor allele frequency ≤ 2% in controls. We further look for excess of rare damaging homozygous variants in DNA repair pathways by counting number of homozygous rare variants in cases and controls and testing significance by Fisher exact test. Although this study did not have power to detect such alleles by association testing or by gene burden tests, we catalogued all candidate alleles that fulfilled these criteria.

Additional Information

How to cite this article: Timofeeva, M. N. et al.Recurrent Coding Sequence Variation Explains Only A Small Fraction of the Genetic Architecture of Colorectal Cancer. Sci. Rep.5, 16286; doi: 10.1038/srep16286 (2015).
  55 in total

1.  Genetic heterogeneity in human disease.

Authors:  Jon McClellan; Mary-Claire King
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 41.582

2.  General framework for meta-analysis of rare variants in sequencing association studies.

Authors:  Seunggeun Lee; Tanya M Teslovich; Michael Boehnke; Xihong Lin
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  A germline homozygous mutation in the base-excision repair gene NTHL1 causes adenomatous polyposis and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Robbert D A Weren; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; C Marleen Kets; Richarda M de Voer; Eugène T P Verwiel; Liesbeth Spruijt; Wendy A G van Zelst-Stams; Marjolijn C Jongmans; Christian Gilissen; Jayne Y Hehir-Kwa; Alexander Hoischen; Jay Shendure; Evan A Boyle; Eveline J Kamping; Iris D Nagtegaal; Bastiaan B J Tops; Fokko M Nagengast; Ad Geurts van Kessel; J Han J M van Krieken; Roland P Kuiper; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 38.330

4.  Optimal unified approach for rare-variant association testing with application to small-sample case-control whole-exome sequencing studies.

Authors:  Seunggeun Lee; Mary J Emond; Michael J Bamshad; Kathleen C Barnes; Mark J Rieder; Deborah A Nickerson; David C Christiani; Mark M Wurfel; Xihong Lin
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Integrative analysis of complex cancer genomics and clinical profiles using the cBioPortal.

Authors:  Jianjiong Gao; Bülent Arman Aksoy; Ugur Dogrusoz; Gideon Dresdner; Benjamin Gross; S Onur Sumer; Yichao Sun; Anders Jacobsen; Rileen Sinha; Erik Larsson; Ethan Cerami; Chris Sander; Nikolaus Schultz
Journal:  Sci Signal       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 8.192

6.  Long-range epigenetic silencing of chromosome 5q31 protocadherins is involved in early and late stages of colorectal tumorigenesis through modulation of oncogenic pathways.

Authors:  A R Dallosso; B Øster; A Greenhough; K Thorsen; T J Curry; C Owen; A L Hancock; M Szemes; C Paraskeva; M Frank; C L Andersen; K Malik
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 9.867

Review 7.  Identification of Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Tumors in a Genome-Wide Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ulrike Peters; Shuo Jiao; Fredrick R Schumacher; Carolyn M Hutter; Aaron K Aragaki; John A Baron; Sonja I Berndt; Stéphane Bézieau; Hermann Brenner; Katja Butterbach; Bette J Caan; Peter T Campbell; Christopher S Carlson; Graham Casey; Andrew T Chan; Jenny Chang-Claude; Stephen J Chanock; Lin S Chen; Gerhard A Coetzee; Simon G Coetzee; David V Conti; Keith R Curtis; David Duggan; Todd Edwards; Charles S Fuchs; Steven Gallinger; Edward L Giovannucci; Stephanie M Gogarten; Stephen B Gruber; Robert W Haile; Tabitha A Harrison; Richard B Hayes; Brian E Henderson; Michael Hoffmeister; John L Hopper; Thomas J Hudson; David J Hunter; Rebecca D Jackson; Sun Ha Jee; Mark A Jenkins; Wei-Hua Jia; Laurence N Kolonel; Charles Kooperberg; Sébastien Küry; Andrea Z Lacroix; Cathy C Laurie; Cecelia A Laurie; Loic Le Marchand; Mathieu Lemire; David Levine; Noralane M Lindor; Yan Liu; Jing Ma; Karen W Makar; Keitaro Matsuo; Polly A Newcomb; John D Potter; Ross L Prentice; Conghui Qu; Thomas Rohan; Stephanie A Rosse; Robert E Schoen; Daniela Seminara; Martha Shrubsole; Xiao-Ou Shu; Martha L Slattery; Darin Taverna; Stephen N Thibodeau; Cornelia M Ulrich; Emily White; Yongbing Xiang; Brent W Zanke; Yi-Xin Zeng; Ben Zhang; Wei Zheng; Li Hsu
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2012-12-22       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  The cBio cancer genomics portal: an open platform for exploring multidimensional cancer genomics data.

Authors:  Ethan Cerami; Jianjiong Gao; Ugur Dogrusoz; Benjamin E Gross; Selcuk Onur Sumer; Bülent Arman Aksoy; Anders Jacobsen; Caitlin J Byrne; Michael L Heuer; Erik Larsson; Yevgeniy Antipin; Boris Reva; Arthur P Goldberg; Chris Sander; Nikolaus Schultz
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 39.397

9.  Annotation of functional variation in personal genomes using RegulomeDB.

Authors:  Alan P Boyle; Eurie L Hong; Manoj Hariharan; Yong Cheng; Marc A Schaub; Maya Kasowski; Konrad J Karczewski; Julie Park; Benjamin C Hitz; Shuai Weng; J Michael Cherry; Michael Snyder
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  The NHGRI GWAS Catalog, a curated resource of SNP-trait associations.

Authors:  Danielle Welter; Jacqueline MacArthur; Joannella Morales; Tony Burdett; Peggy Hall; Heather Junkins; Alan Klemm; Paul Flicek; Teri Manolio; Lucia Hindorff; Helen Parkinson
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  14 in total

1.  Rare Variants in the DNA Repair Pathway and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  David V Conti; Stephanie L Schmit; Marco Matejcic; Hiba A Shaban; Melanie W Quintana; Fredrick R Schumacher; Christopher K Edlund; Leah Naghi; Rish K Pai; Robert W Haile; A Joan Levine; Daniel D Buchanan; Mark A Jenkins; Jane C Figueiredo; Gad Rennert; Stephen B Gruber; Li Li; Graham Casey
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 4.090

2.  Rare disruptive mutations and their contribution to the heritable risk of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Daniel Chubb; Peter Broderick; Sara E Dobbins; Matthew Frampton; Ben Kinnersley; Steven Penegar; Amy Price; Yussanne P Ma; Amy L Sherborne; Claire Palles; Maria N Timofeeva; D Timothy Bishop; Malcolm G Dunlop; Ian Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 14.919

3.  Correspondence: SEMA4A variation and risk of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Ben Kinnersley; Daniel Chubb; Sara E Dobbins; Matthew Frampton; Stephan Buch; Maria N Timofeeva; Sergi Castellví-Bel; Susan M Farrington; Asta Forsti; Jochen Hampe; Kari Hemminki; Robert M W Hofstra; Emma Northwood; Claire Palles; Manuela Pinheiro; Clara Ruiz-Ponte; Clemens Schafmayer; Manuel R Teixeira; Helga Westers; Tom van Wezel; D Timothy Bishop; Ian Tomlinson; Malcolm G Dunlop; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Evidence for genetic association between chromosome 1q loci and predisposition to colorectal neoplasia.

Authors:  Stephanie A Schubert; Dina Ruano; Fadwa A Elsayed; Arnoud Boot; Stijn Crobach; Arantza Farina Sarasqueta; Bruce Wolffenbuttel; Melanie M van der Klauw; Jan Oosting; Carli M Tops; Ronald van Eijk; Hans Fa Vasen; Rolf Ham Vossen; Maartje Nielsen; Sergi Castellví-Bel; Clara Ruiz-Ponte; Ian Tomlinson; Malcolm G Dunlop; Pavel Vodicka; Juul T Wijnen; Frederik J Hes; Hans Morreau; Noel Fcc de Miranda; Rolf H Sijmons; Tom van Wezel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Coding variants in NOD-like receptors: An association study on risk and survival of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Stefanie Huhn; Miguel I da Silva Filho; Tharmila Sanmuganantham; Tica Pichulik; Calogerina Catalano; Barbara Pardini; Alessio Naccarati; Veronika Polakova-Vymetálkova; Katerina Jiraskova; Ludmila Vodickova; Pavel Vodicka; Markus W Löffler; Lioba Courth; Jan Wehkamp; Farhat V N Din; Maria Timofeeva; Susan M Farrington; Lina Jansen; Kari Hemminki; Jenny Chang-Claude; Hermann Brenner; Michael Hoffmeister; Malcolm G Dunlop; Alexander N R Weber; Asta Försti
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  A Systematic Analysis of Interactions between Environmental Risk Factors and Genetic Variation in Susceptibility to Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Maria Timofeeva; Evropi Theodoratou; Tian Yang; Xue Li; Susan M Farrington; Malcolm G Dunlop; Harry Campbell
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  Validation of Recently Proposed Colorectal Cancer Susceptibility Gene Variants in an Analysis of Families and Patients-a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Peter Broderick; Sara E Dobbins; Daniel Chubb; Ben Kinnersley; Malcolm G Dunlop; Ian Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Recurrent, low-frequency coding variants contributing to colorectal cancer in the Swedish population.

Authors:  Xiang Jiao; Wen Liu; Hovsep Mahdessian; Patrick Bryant; Jenny Ringdahl; Maria Timofeeva; Susan M Farrington; Malcolm Dunlop; Annika Lindblom
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Exploring causality in the association between circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D and colorectal cancer risk: a large Mendelian randomisation study.

Authors:  Yazhou He; Maria Timofeeva; Susan M Farrington; Peter Vaughan-Shaw; Victoria Svinti; Marion Walker; Lina Zgaga; Xiangrui Meng; Xue Li; Athina Spiliopoulou; Xia Jiang; Elina Hyppönen; Peter Kraft; Douglas P Kiel; Caroline Hayward; Archie Campbell; David Porteous; Katarina Vucic; Iva Kirac; Masa Filipovic; Sarah E Harris; Ian J Deary; Richard Houlston; Ian P Tomlinson; Harry Campbell; Evropi Theodoratou; Malcolm G Dunlop
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  Genome-wide scan of the effect of common nsSNPs on colorectal cancer survival outcome.

Authors:  Evropi Theodoratou; Susan M Farrington; Maria Timofeeva; Farhat Vn Din; Victoria Svinti; Albert Tenesa; Tao Liu; Annika Lindblom; Steven Gallinger; Harry Campbell; Malcolm G Dunlop
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.