Literature DB >> 27796716

Association of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with genetic variants showing differential allelic expression: identification of a modifier of breast cancer risk at locus 11q22.3.

Yosr Hamdi1, Penny Soucy1, Karoline B Kuchenbaeker2,3, Tomi Pastinen4,5, Arnaud Droit1, Audrey Lemaçon1, Julian Adlard6, Kristiina Aittomäki7, Irene L Andrulis8,9, Adalgeir Arason10,11, Norbert Arnold12, Banu K Arun13, Jacopo Azzollini14, Anita Bane15, Laure Barjhoux16, Daniel Barrowdale2, Javier Benitez17,18,19, Pascaline Berthet20, Marinus J Blok21, Kristie Bobolis22, Valérie Bonadona23, Bernardo Bonanni24, Angela R Bradbury25, Carole Brewer26, Bruno Buecher27, Saundra S Buys28, Maria A Caligo29, Jocelyne Chiquette30, Wendy K Chung31, Kathleen B M Claes32, Mary B Daly33, Francesca Damiola16, Rosemarie Davidson34, Miguel De la Hoya35, Kim De Leeneer32, Orland Diez36, Yuan Chun Ding37, Riccardo Dolcetti38,39, Susan M Domchek25, Cecilia M Dorfling40, Diana Eccles41, Ros Eeles42, Zakaria Einbeigi43, Bent Ejlertsen44, Christoph Engel45,46, D Gareth Evans47, Lidia Feliubadalo48, Lenka Foretova49, Florentia Fostira50, William D Foulkes51, George Fountzilas52, Eitan Friedman53,54, Debra Frost2, Pamela Ganschow55, Patricia A Ganz56, Judy Garber57, Simon A Gayther58, Anne-Marie Gerdes59, Gord Glendon8, Andrew K Godwin60, David E Goldgar61, Mark H Greene62, Jacek Gronwald63, Eric Hahnen64, Ute Hamann65, Thomas V O Hansen66, Steven Hart67, John L Hays68,69,70, Frans B L Hogervorst71, Peter J Hulick72, Evgeny N Imyanitov73, Claudine Isaacs74, Louise Izatt75, Anna Jakubowska63, Paul James76,77, Ramunas Janavicius78,79, Uffe Birk Jensen80, Esther M John81,82, Vijai Joseph83, Walter Just84, Katarzyna Kaczmarek63, Beth Y Karlan85, Carolien M Kets86, Judy Kirk87, Mieke Kriege88, Yael Laitman53, Maïté Laurent27, Conxi Lazaro48, Goska Leslie2, Jenny Lester85, Fabienne Lesueur89, Annelie Liljegren90, Niklas Loman91, Jennifer T Loud62, Siranoush Manoukian14, Milena Mariani14, Sylvie Mazoyer92, Lesley McGuffog2, Hanne E J Meijers-Heijboer93, Alfons Meindl12, Austin Miller94, Marco Montagna95, Anna Marie Mulligan9,96, Katherine L Nathanson25, Susan L Neuhausen37, Heli Nevanlinna97, Robert L Nussbaum98, Edith Olah99, Olufunmilayo I Olopade100, Kai-Ren Ong101, Jan C Oosterwijk102, Ana Osorio17,18, Laura Papi103, Sue Kyung Park104, Inge Sokilde Pedersen105, Bernard Peissel14, Pedro Perez Segura106, Paolo Peterlongo107, Catherine M Phelan108, Paolo Radice109, Johanna Rantala110, Christine Rappaport-Fuerhauser111, Gad Rennert112, Andrea Richardson113, Mark Robson114, Gustavo C Rodriguez115, Matti A Rookus116, Rita Katharina Schmutzler64,117,118, Nicolas Sevenet119, Payal D Shah25, Christian F Singer111, Thomas P Slavin55, Katie Snape120, Johanna Sokolowska121, Ida Marie Heeholm Sønderstrup122, Melissa Southey123, Amanda B Spurdle124, Zsofia Stadler125, Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet27, Grzegorz Sukiennicki63, Christian Sutter126, Yen Tan111, Muy-Kheng Tea111, Manuel R Teixeira127,128, Alex Teulé129, Soo-Hwang Teo130,131, Mary Beth Terry132, Mads Thomassen133, Laima Tihomirova134, Marc Tischkowitz51,135, Silvia Tognazzo95, Amanda Ewart Toland136, Nadine Tung137, Ans M W van den Ouweland138, Rob B van der Luijt139, Klaartje van Engelen140, Elizabeth J van Rensburg40, Raymonda Varon-Mateeva141, Barbara Wappenschmidt64, Juul T Wijnen142, Timothy Rebbeck25,143, Georgia Chenevix-Trench124, Kenneth Offit83, Fergus J Couch67,144, Silje Nord145, Douglas F Easton2, Antonis C Antoniou2, Jacques Simard146.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Cis-acting regulatory SNPs resulting in differential allelic expression (DAE) may, in part, explain the underlying phenotypic variation associated with many complex diseases. To investigate whether common variants associated with DAE were involved in breast cancer susceptibility among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, a list of 175 genes was developed based of their involvement in cancer-related pathways.
METHODS: Using data from a genome-wide map of SNPs associated with allelic expression, we assessed the association of ~320 SNPs located in the vicinity of these genes with breast and ovarian cancer risks in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained from 54 studies participating in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2.
RESULTS: We identified a region on 11q22.3 that is significantly associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers (most significant SNP rs228595 p = 7 × 10-6). This association was absent in BRCA2 carriers (p = 0.57). The 11q22.3 region notably encompasses genes such as ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. Expression quantitative trait loci associations were observed in both normal breast and tumors across this region, namely for ACAT1, ATM, and other genes. In silico analysis revealed some overlap between top risk-associated SNPs and relevant biological features in mammary cell data, which suggests potential functional significance.
CONCLUSION: We identified 11q22.3 as a new modifier locus in BRCA1 carriers. Replication in larger studies using estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers; Breast cancer; Cis-regulatory variants; Differential allelic expression; Genetic modifiers; Genetic susceptibility

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27796716      PMCID: PMC5222911          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-4018-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.624


Introduction

Pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes substantially increase a woman’s lifetime risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers [1-4]. These risks vary significantly according to (a) age at disease diagnosis in carriers of identical mutations, (b) the cancer site in the individual who led to the family’s ascertainment, (c) the degree of family history of the disease [1, 4, 5], and (d) the type and location of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations [6]. These observations suggest that other factors, including lifestyle/hormonal factors [7] as well as other genetic factors, modify cancer risks in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Direct evidence for such genetic modifiers of risk has been obtained through the association studies performed by the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA), which have shown that several common breast cancer susceptibility alleles identified through population-based genome-wide association studies (GWASs) are also associated with breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers [8-10]. Global analysis of GWAS data has shown that the vast majority of common variants associated with susceptibility to cancer lie within genomic non-coding regions and are predicted to account for cancer risk through regulation of gene expression [11, 12]. A recent expression quantitative trait loci (cis-eQTL) analysis for mRNA expression in 149 known cancer risk loci performed in five tumor types (breast, colon, kidney, lung, and prostate) has shown that approximately 30 % of such risk loci were significantly associated with eQTLs present in at least one gene within 500 kb [13]. These results suggest that additional cancer susceptibility loci may be identified through studying genetic variants that affect the regulation of gene expression. In the present study, we selected genes of interest for their known involvement in cancer etiology, identified 320 genetic variants in the vicinity of these genes with evidence of differential allelic expression (DAE), and then investigated the associations of these variants with breast and ovarian cancer risks among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. These included variants in genes involved in DNA repair (homologous recombination and DNA interstrand crosslink repair), interaction with and/or modulation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 cellular functions, cell cycle control, centrosome amplification and interaction with AURKA, apoptosis, ubiquitination, as well as known tumor suppressors, mitotic kinases, and other kinases, sex steroid action, and mammographic density.

Materials and methods

Subjects

All study participants were female carriers of a deleterious germline mutation in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 and aged 18 years or older [14]. Fifty-four collaborating CIMBA studies contributed a total of 23,463 samples (15,252 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers) to this study, including 12,127 with breast cancer (7797 BRCA1 and 4330 BRCA2 carriers) and 3093 with ovarian cancer (2462 BRCA1 and 631 BRCA2 carriers). The number of samples included from each study is provided in Online Resource 1. The recruitment strategies, clinical, demographic, and phenotypic data collected from each participant have been previously reported [14].

Ethics statement

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers were recruited through the CIMBA initiative, following approval of the corresponding protocol by the Institutional Review Board or Ethics Committee at each participating center (Online Resource 2); written informed consent was obtained from all study participants [8, 9].

SNP selection and differential allelic expression

SNP selection was performed by first identifying a list of 175 genes of interest involved in cancer-related pathways and/or mechanisms. The list of genes was established by analyzing published results and by using available public databases such as the Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (http://www.genome.jp/kegg/). Next, DAE SNPs located within these gene regions were identified using previously reported data on allelic expression cis-associations, derived using (1) the lllumina Human1M-duo BeadChip for lymphoblastoid cell lines from Caucasians (CEU population) (n = 53) [15], the Illumina Human 1M Omni-quad for primary skin fibroblasts derived from Caucasian donors (n = 62) [13, 16], and the Illumina Infinium II assay with Human 1.2M Duo custom BeadChip v1 for human primary monocytes (n = 188) [17]. Briefly, 1000 Genomes project data were used as a reference set (release 1000G Phase I v3) for the imputation of genotypes from HapMap individuals. Genotypes were inferred using algorithms implemented in IMPUTE2 [18]. The unrelated fibroblast panel consisted of 31 parent–offspring trios, in which the genotypes of offspring were used to permit accurate phasing. Mapping of each allelic expression trait was carried out by first normalizing allelic expression ratios at each SNP using a polynomial method [19] and then calculating average phased allelic expression scores across annotated transcripts, followed by correlation of these scores to local (transcript ± 500 kb) SNP genotypes in fibroblasts as described earlier [16]. A total of 355 genetic variants were selected on the basis of evidence of association with DAE in the selected 175 genes (see Online Resource 3 for a complete list of SNPs and genes). Following the selection process, SNPs were submitted for design and inclusion on a custom-made Illumina Infinium array (iCOGS) as previously described [8, 9]. Following probe design and post-genotyping quality control, 316 and 317 SNPs were available for association analysis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. Genotyping and quality control procedures have been described in detail elsewhere [8, 9].

Statistical analysis

Associations between genotypes and breast and ovarian cancer risks were evaluated within a survival analysis framework, using a one degree-of-freedom score test statistic based on modeling the retrospective likelihood of the observed genotypes conditional on the disease phenotypes [20, 21]. To estimate the magnitude of the associations [hazard ratios (HRs)], we maximized the retrospective likelihood, which was parameterized in terms of the per-allele HR. All analyses were stratified by country of residence and using calendar year and cohort-specific incidence rates of breast and ovarian cancers for mutation carriers. Given 320 tests, the cutoff value for significance after a Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing was p < 1.5 × 10−4. The associations between the genotypes and tumor subtypes were evaluated using an extension of the retrospective likelihood approach that models the association with two or more subtypes simultaneously [22]. Imputation was performed separately for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers to estimate genotypes for other common variants across a ±50-kb region centered around the 12 most strongly associated SNPs (following the NCBI Build 37 assembly), using the March 2012 release of the 1000 Genomes Project as the reference panel and the IMPUTE v.2.2 software [18]. In all analyses, only SNPs with an imputation accuracy coefficient r 2 >0.30 were considered [8, 9].

Functional annotation

Publicly available genomic data were used to annotate the SNPs most strongly associated with breast cancer risk at locus 11q22.3. The following regulatory features were obtained for breast cell types from ENCODE and NIH Roadmap Epigenomics data through the UCSC Genome Browser: DNase I hypersensitivity sites, chromatin hidden Markov modeling (ChromHMM) states, and histone modifications of epigenetic markers, more specifically commonly used marks associated with enhancers (H3K4Me1 and H3K27Ac) and promoters (H3K4Me3 and H3K9Ac). To identify putative target genes, we examined potential functional chromatin interactions between distal and proximal regulatory transcription factor-binding sites and the promoters at the risk loci, using the chromatin interaction analysis by paired end tag (ChiA-PET) and genome conformation capture (Hi-C, 3C, and 5C) datasets downloaded from GEO and from 4D-genome [23]. Maps of active mammary super-enhancer regions in human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs) were obtained from Hnisz et al. [24]. Enhancer–promoter specific interactions were predicted from the integrated method for predicting enhancer targets (IM-PETs) [25]. RNA-Seq data from ENCODE was used to evaluate the expression of exons across the 11q22.3 locus in MCF7 and HMEC cell lines. For MCF7 and HMEC, alignment files from 19 and 4 expression datasets, respectively, were downloaded from ENCODE using a rest API wrapper (ENCODExplorer R package) [26] in the bam format and processed using metagene R packages [27] to normalize in Reads per Millions aligned and to convert into coverages.

eQTL analyses

The influence of germline genetic variations on gene expression was assessed using a linear regression model, as implemented in the R library eMAP (http://www.bios.unc.edu/~weisun/software.htm). An additive effect was inferred by modeling subjects’ copy number of the rare allele, i.e., 0, 1, or 2 for a given genotype. Only relationships in cis (defined as those for which the SNP is located at <1 Mb upstream or downstream from the center of the transcript) were investigated. The eQTL analyses were performed on both normal and tumor breast tissues (see Online Resource 4 for the list and description of datasets, as well as the sources of genotype and expression data). For all sample sets, the genotyping data were processed as follows: SNPs with call rates <0.95 or minor allele frequencies, MAFs (<0.05) were excluded, as were SNPs out of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium with P < 10−13. All samples with a call rate <80 % were excluded. Identity by state was computed using the R GenABEL package [28], and samples from closely related individuals whose identity by state was lower than 0.95 were removed. The SNP and sample filtration criteria were applied iteratively until all samples and SNPs met the set thresholds.

Results

From the 175 genes selected for their involvement in cancer-related pathways and/or mechanisms, we identified a set of 355 genetic variants showing evidence of association with DAE (see Online Resource 3 for the complete list of genes and SNPs). Of those, 39 and 38 SNPs were excluded because of low Illumina design scores, low call rates, and/or evidence of deviation from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (P value <10−7), for BRCA1 and BRCA2 analyses, respectively. A total of 316 and 317 SNPs (representing 227 independent SNPs with a pairwise r 2 <0.1) were successfully genotyped in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. Association results for breast and ovarian cancer risks for all SNPs are presented in Online Resource 5.

Breast cancer association analysis

Evidence of association with breast cancer risk (at p < 10−2) was observed for nine SNPs in BRCA1 mutation carriers and three SNPs in BRCA2 mutation carriers (Table 1). The strongest association with breast cancer risk among BRCA1 carriers was observed for rs6589007, located at 11q22.3 in intron 15 of the NPAT gene (p = 4.6 × 10−3) at approximately 54 kb upstream of the ATM gene. Similar associations were observed for two other highly correlated variants (r 2 >0.8) on chromosome 11, namely rs183459 (p = 5.7 × 10−3) also located within NPAT and rs228592 (p = 5.5 × 10−3) located in intron 11 of ATM. No association was observed between SNPs at this locus and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 carriers (Online Resource 5).
Table 1

Associations with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers for SNPs observed at p < 10−2

LocationsPositionsSNPsNearest genesUnaffected (number)Affected (number)Unaffected (MAF)Affected (MAF)HR* (95 % CI) p values
BRCA1 mutation carriers
 1q42.13227,308,416rs11806633 CDC42BPA 745577970.070.061.128 (1.039–1.225)4.8 × 10−3
 2p23.228,319,320rs6721310 BRE 745477930.330.331.064 (1.018–1.111)5.4 × 10−3
 2q11.2100,019,496rs2305354 REV1 745177960.440.451.057 (1.015–1.100)7.1 × 10−3
 4p15.3314,858,341rs1389999 CEBP 745477950.350.350.940 (0.901–0.982)5.3 × 10−3
 5q14.179,901,952rs425463 DHFR, MSH3 743077550.330.351.058 (1.013–1.105)9.5 × 10−3
 11q22.3108,040,104rs6589007 NPAT, ACAT1, ATM 745177970.410.421.062 (1.019–1.107)4.6 × 10−3
 11q22.3108,089,197rs183459 NPAT, ATM 744777890.400.411.061 (1.018–1.105)5.7 × 10−3
 11q22.3108,123,189rs228592 ATM 744977920.420.411.061 (1.018–1.106)5.5 × 10−3
 12p13.33986,004rs7967755 WNK1, RAD52 745477970.160.1520.927 (0.876–0.980)7.5 × 10−3
BRCA2 mutation carriers
 6p22.128,231,243rs9468322 NKAPL 388043290.040.051.235 (1.080–1.412)4.2 × 10−3
 8q11.2148,708,742rs6982040 PRKDC 387643270.0060.0020.497 (0.292–0.843)2.7 × 10−3
 16p13.31,371,154rs2268049 UBE2I 388043250.140.161.116 (1.031–1.207)4.5 × 10−3

CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, MAF minor allele frequency, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism

* Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis

Associations with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers for SNPs observed at p < 10−2 CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, MAF minor allele frequency, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism * Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis The strongest evidence of association with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed for rs6982040, located at 8q11.21 in intron 74 of the PRKDC gene (p = 2.7 × 10−3). However, this variant had a very low frequency in affected and unaffected individuals (MAF values of 0.002 and 0.006, respectively). No association was observed for this locus in BRCA1 carriers (Online Resource 5). Of the nine SNPs associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers, three were primarily associated with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer: rs11806633 at 1q42.13 in the CDC42BPA gene (p = 9.0 × 10−3), rs6721310 at 2p23.2 in the BRE gene (p = 3.0 × 10−3), and rs2305354 at 2q11.2 in the REV1 gene (p = 1.0 × 10−3), although the differences between ER-positive and ER-negative disease associations were not statistically significant (Table 2). Of the three BRCA2-associated loci, only rs9468322 at 6p22.1 was associated with ER-positive disease (p = 5.0 × 10−4), although the differences in HRs between ER-positive and ER-negative tumors were not statistically significant (Table 2).
Table 2

Associations with breast cancer risk by tumor subtype in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

LocationsPositionsSNPsER-positiveER-negativeER-diff
HR (95 % CI) p valuesHR (95 % CI) p values p-diff
BRCA1 mutation carriers
 1q42.13227,308,416rs118066331.10 (0.90–1.33)0.351.14 (1.03–1.25)9.0 × 10−3 0.73
 2p23.228,319,320rs67213101.00 (0.88–1.09)0.961.08 (1.04–1.15)3.0 × 10−3 0.20
 2q11.2100,019,496rs23053540.98 (0.91–1.10)0.711.09 (1.03–1.13)1.0 × 10−3 0.09
 4p15.3314,858,341rs13899990.94 (0.85–1.04)0.200.94 (0.89–0.99)2.0 × 10−2 0.95
 5q14.179,901,952rs4254631.04 (0.94–1.15)0.481.07 (1.01–1.12)1.6 × 10−2 0.67
 11q22.3108,040,104rs65890071.08 (0.99–1.19)9.8 × 10−2 1.06 (1.01–1.11)2.0 × 10−2 0.66
 11q22.3108,089,197rs1834591.08 (0.99–1.19)9.3 × 10−2 1.05 (1.00–1.11)3.7 × 10−2 0.62
 11q22.3108,123,189rs2285921.08 (0.96–1.19)9.7 × 10−2 1.06 (1.00–1.11)3.4 × 10−2 0.64
 12p13.33986,004rs79677550.96 (0.84–1.09)0.540.92 (0.86–0.98)1.0 × 10−2 0.56
BRCA2 mutation carriers
 6p22.128,231,243rs94683221.30 (1.12–1.51)5.0 × 10−4 1.00 (0.72–1.40)0.990.17
 8q11.2148,708,742rs6982040N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A
 16p13.31,371,154rs22680491.10 (1.01–1.21)4.0 × 10−2 1.17 (0.98–1.39)8.0 × 10−2 0.56

CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism, N/A not available

* Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis

Associations with breast cancer risk by tumor subtype in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism, N/A not available * Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis Although evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for the above-described loci in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, none of these associations reached significance after a Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing. Imputation using the 1000 Genomes data (encompassing ± 50 kb centered on each of the 12 associated variants, Online Resource 6) identified several SNPs with significant associations in BRCA1 mutation carriers at the 11q22.3 locus (with SNP rs228595 as the most significant, p = 7.38 × 10−6), and which were partly correlated with the genotyped SNPs (r 2 <0.4, Fig. 1). After imputation, we also found associations (albeit not statistically significant after multiple testing adjustments), between one imputed SNP at locus 12p13 (rs2255390, p = 5.0 × 10−4) and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers, and two SNPs and breast cancer risk for BRCA2 carriers, namely 6p22 (chr6:28226644:I, p = 9.0 × 10−4) and 8q11 (rs189286892, p = 2.0 × 10−4).
Fig. 1

Manhattan plot depicting the strength of association between breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers and all imputed and genotyped SNPs located across the 11q22.3 locus bound by hg19 coordinates chr11:107990104_108173189. Directly genotyped SNPs are represented as triangles and imputed SNPs (r 2 > 0.3, MAF > 0.02) are represented as circles. The linkage disequilibrium (r 2) for the most strongly associated genotyped SNP with each SNP was computed based on subjects of European ancestry that were included in the 1000 Genome Mar 2012 EUR release. Pairwise r 2 values are plotted using a red scale, where white and red means r 2 = 0 and 1, respectively. SNPs are plotted according to their chromosomal position: physical locations are based on the GRCh37/hg19 map. SNP rs228606 was genotyped in the iCOGS array but was not included in our original hypothesis of association with DAE. Gene annotation is based on the NCBI RefSeq gene descriptors from the UCSC genome browser

Manhattan plot depicting the strength of association between breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers and all imputed and genotyped SNPs located across the 11q22.3 locus bound by hg19 coordinates chr11:107990104_108173189. Directly genotyped SNPs are represented as triangles and imputed SNPs (r 2 > 0.3, MAF > 0.02) are represented as circles. The linkage disequilibrium (r 2) for the most strongly associated genotyped SNP with each SNP was computed based on subjects of European ancestry that were included in the 1000 Genome Mar 2012 EUR release. Pairwise r 2 values are plotted using a red scale, where white and red means r 2 = 0 and 1, respectively. SNPs are plotted according to their chromosomal position: physical locations are based on the GRCh37/hg19 map. SNP rs228606 was genotyped in the iCOGS array but was not included in our original hypothesis of association with DAE. Gene annotation is based on the NCBI RefSeq gene descriptors from the UCSC genome browser

Ovarian cancer association analyses

Evidence of association with ovarian cancer risk (p < 10−2) was observed for six SNPs in BRCA1 mutation carriers and three SNPs in BRCA2 mutation carriers (Table 3). The strongest association with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 carriers was observed for rs12025623 located at 1p36.12 (p = 7 × 10−3) in an intron of the ALPL gene. Another correlated variant (r 2 >0.7) on chromosome 1 was also genotyped, namely rs1767429 (p = 9 × 10−3), which was also located within ALPL. The strongest evidence of association with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers was observed for rs2233025 (p = 5 × 10−3), located at 1p32.22 within the MAD2L2 gene. None of these associations remained statistically significant after multiple testing adjustments. Imputed genotypes of SNPs in a region encompassing ± 50 kb centered on each of the nine associated variants did not identify stronger associations.
Table 3

Associations with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers for SNPs observed at p < 10−2

LocationsPositionsSNPsNearest genesUnaffected (number)Affected (number)Unaffected (MAF)HR* (95 % CI) p values
BRCA1 mutation carriers
 1p36.1221,889,340rs1767429 ALPL, RAP1GAP 12,76524600.421.092 (1.024–1.164)9 × 10−3
 1p36.1221,892,479rs12025623 ALPL, RAP1GAP 12,78924600.361.098 (1.027–1.173)7 × 10−3
 6p21.3232,913,246rs1480380 BRD2, HLA-DMB, HLA-DMA 12,79024620.071.178 (1.041–1.333)9 × 10−3
 10p12.127,434,716rs788209 ANKRD26, YME1L1, MASTL, ACBD5 12,75424550.150.879 (0.804–0.961)5 × 10−3
 17p13.18,071,592rs3027247 MIR3676, C17orf59, AURKB, C17orf44, C17orf68, PFAS 12,78624610.290.905 (0.844–0.970)5 × 10−3
 17q2253,032,425rs17817865 MIR4315-1, TOM1L1, COX11, STXBP4 12,79024620.270.905 (0.842–0.971)8 × 10−3
BRCA2 mutation carriers
 1p32.2211,735,652rs2233025 MAD2L2, FBXO6 75746310.180.777 (0.657–0.919)5 × 10−3
 9p13.335,055,669rs595429 VCP, FANCG, c9orf131 75796310.460.856 (0.758–0.964)6 × 10−3
 17q25.376,219,783rs2239680 DHX29, SKIV2L2 75796300.280.828 (0.722–0.948)7 × 10−3

CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, MAF minor allele frequency, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism

* Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis

Associations with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers for SNPs observed at p < 10−2 CI confidence interval, HR hazard ratio, MAF minor allele frequency, SNP single-nucleotide polymorphism * Hazard ratio per allele (one degree of freedom) estimated from the retrospective likelihood analysis

eQTL analysis in breast tissue

To identify the genes influenced via the observed associations with breast cancer at locus 11q22.3, eQTL analysis was performed using gene expression data from tumor and normal breast tissues (for detailed descriptions of datasets, refer to Online Resource 4), and all genotyped as well as imputed SNPs within a 1-Mb region on either side of the most significant genotyped SNP. eQTL associations were observed in both normal and tumor breast tissues in this region, although none of those were correlated with our most significant risk SNPs (Online Resource 7). The strongest eQTL associations were observed in the breast cancer tissue dataset BC241 for the SLC35F2 gene (rs181187590, p = 1.4 × 10−5, r 2 = 0.08, i.e., 8 % of the variation in SLC35F2 expression was attributable to this SNP). Other eQTLs observed in this dataset included ELMOD1 (rs181187590, p = 1.3 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.06), EXPH5 (rs181187590, p = 3 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.054), and ATM (rs4987915, p = 3.7 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.05). In The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) BC765 breast cancer dataset, the strongest associations with gene expression were observed for the non-coding RNA lLOC643923 (rs183293362, p = 2.3 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.02), ATM (rs4987924, p = 8.3 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.015), and KDELC2 (rs4753834, p = 8.6 × 10−4, r 2 = 0.015) loci. The eQTL analysis performed for the TCGA normal breast tissue dataset (NB93) showed an association between SNP chr11:108075271:D and ACAT1 gene expression level (p = 6.5 × 10−3, r 2 = 0.08). No association was observed in the normal breast tissue dataset NB116. In order to assess the potential functional role of the most significant risk SNPs in the 11q22.3 region, ENCODE chromatin biological features were evaluated in available breast cells, namely HMECs, breast myoepithelial cells, and MCF7 breast cancer cells. We observed some overlap between features of interest and candidate SNPs within the 11q22.3 region (Fig. 2). The most interesting variant was rs228606, which overlapped a monomethylated H3K4 mark in HMECs. Analysis of data from the Roadmap Epigenomics project also showed overlap with a monomethylated H3K4 mark and with an acetylated H3K9 mark in primary breast myoepithelial cells. From ChiA-PET data, chromosomal interactions were found in the NPAT and ATM genes in MCF7 cells, located mainly in the vicinity of the promoter regions of these genes, which encompassed a strongly associated imputed SNP at this locus, namely chr11:108098459_TAA_T. Lastly, although super-enhancers and predicted enhancer–promoter interactions mapped to the 11q22.3 locus in HMECs, none overlapped with our top candidate SNPs (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2

Functional annotation of the 11q22.3 locus. Upper panel functional annotations using data from the ENCODE and NIH Roadmap Epigenomics projects. From top to bottom, epigenetic signals evaluated included DNase clusters in MCF7 cells and HMECs, chromatin state segmentation by hidden Markov model (ChromHMM) in HMECs, breast myoepithelial cells, and variant human mammary epithelial cells (vHMECs), where red represents an active promoter region, orange a strong enhancer, and yellow a poised enhancer (the detailed color scheme of chromatin states is described in the UCSC browser), and histone modifications in MCF7 and HMEC cell lines. All tracks were generated by the UCSC genome browser (hg 19 release). Lower panel long-range chromatin interactions: from top to bottom, ChiA-PET interactions for RNA polymerase II in MCF-7 cells identified through ENCODE and 4D-genome. The ChiA-PET raw data available from the GEO database under the following accession (GSE33664, GSE39495) were processed with the GenomicRanges package. Maps of mammary cell super-enhancer locations as defined in Hnisz et al. [24] are shown in HMECs. Predicted enhancer–promoter determined interactions in HMECs, as defined by the integrated method for predicting enhancer targets (IM-PET), are shown. The annotation was obtained through the Bioconductor annotation package TxDb.Hsapiens.UCSC.hg19.knownGene. The tracks have been generated using ggplot2 and ggbio library in R

Functional annotation of the 11q22.3 locus. Upper panel functional annotations using data from the ENCODE and NIH Roadmap Epigenomics projects. From top to bottom, epigenetic signals evaluated included DNase clusters in MCF7 cells and HMECs, chromatin state segmentation by hidden Markov model (ChromHMM) in HMECs, breast myoepithelial cells, and variant human mammary epithelial cells (vHMECs), where red represents an active promoter region, orange a strong enhancer, and yellow a poised enhancer (the detailed color scheme of chromatin states is described in the UCSC browser), and histone modifications in MCF7 and HMEC cell lines. All tracks were generated by the UCSC genome browser (hg 19 release). Lower panel long-range chromatin interactions: from top to bottom, ChiA-PET interactions for RNA polymerase II in MCF-7 cells identified through ENCODE and 4D-genome. The ChiA-PET raw data available from the GEO database under the following accession (GSE33664, GSE39495) were processed with the GenomicRanges package. Maps of mammary cell super-enhancer locations as defined in Hnisz et al. [24] are shown in HMECs. Predicted enhancer–promoter determined interactions in HMECs, as defined by the integrated method for predicting enhancer targets (IM-PET), are shown. The annotation was obtained through the Bioconductor annotation package TxDb.Hsapiens.UCSC.hg19.knownGene. The tracks have been generated using ggplot2 and ggbio library in R

Discussion

DAE is a common phenomenon in human genes, which represents a new approach to identifying cis-acting mechanisms of gene regulation. It offers a new avenue for the study of GWAS variants significantly associated with various diseases/traits. Indeed, the majority of GWAS hits localize outside known protein-coding regions [11, 12], suggesting a regulatory role for these variants. In the present study, we have assessed the association between 320 SNPs associated with DAE and breast/ovarian cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Using this approach, we found evidence of association for a region at 11q22.3, with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Analysis of imputed SNPs across a 185-kb region (±50 kb from the center of each of the three genotyped SNPs at this locus) revealed a set of five strongly correlated SNPs that were significantly associated with breast cancer risk. This region contains several genes including ACAT1, NPAT, and ATM. ACAT1 (acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase 1) encodes a mitochondrial enzyme that catalyzes the reversible formation of acetoacetyl-CoA from two molecules of acetyl-CoA. Defects in this gene are associated with ketothiolase deficiency, an inborn error of isoleucine catabolism [29]. NPAT (nuclear protein, co-activator of histone transcription) is required for progression through the G1 and S phases of the cell cycle, for S phase entry [30], and for the activation of the transcription of histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 [31]. NPAT germline mutations have been associated with Hodgkin lymphoma [32]. Finally, ATM (ataxia telangiectasia mutated) encodes an important cell cycle checkpoint kinase that is required for cellular response to DNA damage and for genome stability. Mutations in this gene are associated with ataxia telangiectasia, an autosomal recessive disorder [33]. ATM is also an intermediate-risk breast cancer susceptibility gene, with rare heterozygous variants being associated with increased risk of developing the disease [34]. Although several studies have assessed the role of the most common ATM variants in breast cancer susceptibility, the results obtained are inconsistent [35]. A recent study had identified an association between an ATM haplotype and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers with a false discovery rate-adjusted p value of 0.029 for overall association of the haplotype [36]. Four of the five SNPs making up the haplotype were almost perfectly correlated (r 2 >0.9) with the three originally genotyped SNPs of the present study. These SNPs were, however, only moderately correlated (r 2 >0.4) with the most significant risk SNPs (p = 10−6), identified later through imputation. Although eQTL analysis has identified cis-eQTL associations between several variants and ACAT1, ATM as well as other neighboring genes in both breast carcinoma and normal breast tissues, none of these associations involved the most significantly associated risk SNPs. Furthermore, the correlation between eQTLs and the most significant risk SNPs was weak. The lack of consistency between the eQTL results and the allelic imbalance data originally used for SNP selection in the design of the present study can probably be explained by the differences between the cell types used in these analyses. The list of allelic imbalance-associated SNPs was selected from studies performed in lymphoblastoid cell lines [15], primary skin fibroblasts [13, 16], and primary monocytes [17], while eQTLs were analyzed in breast carcinoma and normal breast tissue. This tissue heterogeneity in the data sources used represents one of the limitations of this study, although no such data were available in mammary cells when this study was originally designed. The identification of a region at 11q22.3 that is associated specifically with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers may explain why association studies performed using breast cancer cases from the general population have so far yielded conflicting results with regard to common variants at this locus. The majority of tumors arising in BRCA1 carriers show either low or absent ER expression, while the majority of BRCA2-associated tumors are ER positive, as in most sporadic cancers arising in the general population. Large-scale studies using only ER-negative or triple-negative (i.e., ER-, progesterone receptor-, and HER2-negative) cases could therefore be helpful to confirm the association of this locus with breast cancer risk. Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Supplementary material 1 (PDF 56 kb) Supplementary material 2 (DOC 81 kb) Supplementary material 3 (PDF 92 kb) Supplementary material 4 (DOC 34 kb) Supplementary material 5 (XLSX 281 kb) Supplementary material 6 (XLSX 383 kb) Supplementary material 7 (XLSX 180 kb)
  35 in total

1.  GenABEL: an R library for genome-wide association analysis.

Authors:  Yurii S Aulchenko; Stephan Ripke; Aaron Isaacs; Cornelia M van Duijn
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2007-03-23       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  Expression of NPAT, a novel substrate of cyclin E-CDK2, promotes S-phase entry.

Authors:  J Zhao; B Dynlacht; T Imai; T Hori; E Harlow
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  1998-02-15       Impact factor: 11.361

3.  Super-enhancers in the control of cell identity and disease.

Authors:  Denes Hnisz; Brian J Abraham; Tong Ihn Lee; Ashley Lau; Violaine Saint-André; Alla A Sigova; Heather A Hoke; Richard A Young
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 41.582

4.  Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE.

Authors:  Nasim Mavaddat; Susan Peock; Debra Frost; Steve Ellis; Radka Platte; Elena Fineberg; D Gareth Evans; Louise Izatt; Rosalind A Eeles; Julian Adlard; Rosemarie Davidson; Diana Eccles; Trevor Cole; Jackie Cook; Carole Brewer; Marc Tischkowitz; Fiona Douglas; Shirley Hodgson; Lisa Walker; Mary E Porteous; Patrick J Morrison; Lucy E Side; M John Kennedy; Catherine Houghton; Alan Donaldson; Mark T Rogers; Huw Dorkins; Zosia Miedzybrodzka; Helen Gregory; Jacqueline Eason; Julian Barwell; Emma McCann; Alex Murray; Antonis C Antoniou; Douglas F Easton
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-04-29       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Rare, evolutionarily unlikely missense substitutions in ATM confer increased risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Sean V Tavtigian; Peter J Oefner; Davit Babikyan; Anne Hartmann; Sue Healey; Florence Le Calvez-Kelm; Fabienne Lesueur; Graham B Byrnes; Shu-Chun Chuang; Nathalie Forey; Corinna Feuchtinger; Lydie Gioia; Janet Hall; Mia Hashibe; Barbara Herte; Sandrine McKay-Chopin; Alun Thomas; Maxime P Vallée; Catherine Voegele; Penelope M Webb; David C Whiteman; Suleeporn Sangrajrang; John L Hopper; Melissa C Southey; Irene L Andrulis; Esther M John; Georgia Chenevix-Trench
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  A single ataxia telangiectasia gene with a product similar to PI-3 kinase.

Authors:  K Savitsky; A Bar-Shira; S Gilad; G Rotman; Y Ziv; L Vanagaite; D A Tagle; S Smith; T Uziel; S Sfez; M Ashkenazi; I Pecker; M Frydman; R Harnik; S R Patanjali; A Simmons; G A Clines; A Sartiel; R A Gatti; L Chessa; O Sanal; M F Lavin; N G Jaspers; A M Taylor; C F Arlett; T Miki; S M Weissman; M Lovett; F S Collins; Y Shiloh
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-06-23       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Modification of BRCA1-Associated Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk by BRCA1-Interacting Genes.

Authors:  Timothy R Rebbeck; Nandita Mitra; Susan M Domchek; Fei Wan; Tara M Friebel; Teo V Tran; Christian F Singer; Muy-Kheng Maria Tea; Joanne L Blum; Nadine Tung; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Henry T Lynch; Carrie L Snyder; Judy E Garber; Antonis C Antoniou; Susan Peock; D Gareth Evans; Joan Paterson; M John Kennedy; Alan Donaldson; Huw Dorkins; Douglas F Easton; Wendy S Rubinstein; Mary B Daly; Claudine Isaacs; Heli Nevanlinna; Fergus J Couch; Irene L Andrulis; Eitan Freidman; Yael Laitman; Patricia A Ganz; Gail E Tomlinson; Susan L Neuhausen; Steven A Narod; Catherine M Phelan; Roger Greenberg; Katherine L Nathanson
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  Genome-wide association study in BRCA1 mutation carriers identifies novel loci associated with breast and ovarian cancer risk.

Authors:  Fergus J Couch; Xianshu Wang; Lesley McGuffog; Andrew Lee; Curtis Olswold; Karoline B Kuchenbaecker; Penny Soucy; Zachary Fredericksen; Daniel Barrowdale; Joe Dennis; Mia M Gaudet; Ed Dicks; Matthew Kosel; Sue Healey; Olga M Sinilnikova; Adam Lee; François Bacot; Daniel Vincent; Frans B L Hogervorst; Susan Peock; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Anna Jakubowska; Paolo Radice; Rita Katharina Schmutzler; Susan M Domchek; Marion Piedmonte; Christian F Singer; Eitan Friedman; Mads Thomassen; Thomas V O Hansen; Susan L Neuhausen; Csilla I Szabo; Ignacio Blanco; Mark H Greene; Beth Y Karlan; Judy Garber; Catherine M Phelan; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Marco Montagna; Edith Olah; Irene L Andrulis; Andrew K Godwin; Drakoulis Yannoukakos; David E Goldgar; Trinidad Caldes; Heli Nevanlinna; Ana Osorio; Mary Beth Terry; Mary B Daly; Elizabeth J van Rensburg; Ute Hamann; Susan J Ramus; Amanda Ewart Toland; Maria A Caligo; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Nadine Tung; Kathleen Claes; Mary S Beattie; Melissa C Southey; Evgeny N Imyanitov; Marc Tischkowitz; Ramunas Janavicius; Esther M John; Ava Kwong; Orland Diez; Judith Balmaña; Rosa B Barkardottir; Banu K Arun; Gad Rennert; Soo-Hwang Teo; Patricia A Ganz; Ian Campbell; Annemarie H van der Hout; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Caroline Seynaeve; Encarna B Gómez Garcia; Flora E van Leeuwen; Hanne E J Meijers-Heijboer; Johannes J P Gille; Margreet G E M Ausems; Marinus J Blok; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; Matti A Rookus; Peter Devilee; Senno Verhoef; Theo A M van Os; Juul T Wijnen; Debra Frost; Steve Ellis; Elena Fineberg; Radka Platte; D Gareth Evans; Louise Izatt; Rosalind A Eeles; Julian Adlard; Diana M Eccles; Jackie Cook; Carole Brewer; Fiona Douglas; Shirley Hodgson; Patrick J Morrison; Lucy E Side; Alan Donaldson; Catherine Houghton; Mark T Rogers; Huw Dorkins; Jacqueline Eason; Helen Gregory; Emma McCann; Alex Murray; Alain Calender; Agnès Hardouin; Pascaline Berthet; Capucine Delnatte; Catherine Nogues; Christine Lasset; Claude Houdayer; Dominique Leroux; Etienne Rouleau; Fabienne Prieur; Francesca Damiola; Hagay Sobol; Isabelle Coupier; Laurence Venat-Bouvet; Laurent Castera; Marion Gauthier-Villars; Mélanie Léoné; Pascal Pujol; Sylvie Mazoyer; Yves-Jean Bignon; Elżbieta Złowocka-Perłowska; Jacek Gronwald; Jan Lubinski; Katarzyna Durda; Katarzyna Jaworska; Tomasz Huzarski; Amanda B Spurdle; Alessandra Viel; Bernard Peissel; Bernardo Bonanni; Giulia Melloni; Laura Ottini; Laura Papi; Liliana Varesco; Maria Grazia Tibiletti; Paolo Peterlongo; Sara Volorio; Siranoush Manoukian; Valeria Pensotti; Norbert Arnold; Christoph Engel; Helmut Deissler; Dorothea Gadzicki; Andrea Gehrig; Karin Kast; Kerstin Rhiem; Alfons Meindl; Dieter Niederacher; Nina Ditsch; Hansjoerg Plendl; Sabine Preisler-Adams; Stefanie Engert; Christian Sutter; Raymonda Varon-Mateeva; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Bernhard H F Weber; Brita Arver; Marie Stenmark-Askmalm; Niklas Loman; Richard Rosenquist; Zakaria Einbeigi; Katherine L Nathanson; Timothy R Rebbeck; Stephanie V Blank; David E Cohn; Gustavo C Rodriguez; Laurie Small; Michael Friedlander; Victoria L Bae-Jump; Anneliese Fink-Retter; Christine Rappaport; Daphne Gschwantler-Kaulich; Georg Pfeiler; Muy-Kheng Tea; Noralane M Lindor; Bella Kaufman; Shani Shimon Paluch; Yael Laitman; Anne-Bine Skytte; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Inge Sokilde Pedersen; Sanne Traasdahl Moeller; Torben A Kruse; Uffe Birk Jensen; Joseph Vijai; Kara Sarrel; Mark Robson; Noah Kauff; Anna Marie Mulligan; Gord Glendon; Hilmi Ozcelik; Bent Ejlertsen; Finn C Nielsen; Lars Jønson; Mette K Andersen; Yuan Chun Ding; Linda Steele; Lenka Foretova; Alex Teulé; Conxi Lazaro; Joan Brunet; Miquel Angel Pujana; Phuong L Mai; Jennifer T Loud; Christine Walsh; Jenny Lester; Sandra Orsulic; Steven A Narod; Josef Herzog; Sharon R Sand; Silvia Tognazzo; Simona Agata; Tibor Vaszko; Joellen Weaver; Alexandra V Stavropoulou; Saundra S Buys; Atocha Romero; Miguel de la Hoya; Kristiina Aittomäki; Taru A Muranen; Mercedes Duran; Wendy K Chung; Adriana Lasa; Cecilia M Dorfling; Alexander Miron; Javier Benitez; Leigha Senter; Dezheng Huo; Salina B Chan; Anna P Sokolenko; Jocelyne Chiquette; Laima Tihomirova; Tara M Friebel; Bjarni A Agnarsson; Karen H Lu; Flavio Lejbkowicz; Paul A James; Per Hall; Alison M Dunning; Daniel Tessier; Julie Cunningham; Susan L Slager; Chen Wang; Steven Hart; Kristen Stevens; Jacques Simard; Tomi Pastinen; Vernon S Pankratz; Kenneth Offit; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Identification of a BRCA2-specific modifier locus at 6p24 related to breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Mia M Gaudet; Karoline B Kuchenbaecker; Joseph Vijai; Robert J Klein; Tomas Kirchhoff; Lesley McGuffog; Daniel Barrowdale; Alison M Dunning; Andrew Lee; Joe Dennis; Sue Healey; Ed Dicks; Penny Soucy; Olga M Sinilnikova; Vernon S Pankratz; Xianshu Wang; Ronald C Eldridge; Daniel C Tessier; Daniel Vincent; Francois Bacot; Frans B L Hogervorst; Susan Peock; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Paolo Peterlongo; Rita K Schmutzler; Katherine L Nathanson; Marion Piedmonte; Christian F Singer; Mads Thomassen; Thomas v O Hansen; Susan L Neuhausen; Ignacio Blanco; Mark H Greene; Judith Garber; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Irene L Andrulis; David E Goldgar; Emma D'Andrea; Trinidad Caldes; Heli Nevanlinna; Ana Osorio; Elizabeth J van Rensburg; Adalgeir Arason; Gad Rennert; Ans M W van den Ouweland; Annemarie H van der Hout; Carolien M Kets; Cora M Aalfs; Juul T Wijnen; Margreet G E M Ausems; Debra Frost; Steve Ellis; Elena Fineberg; Radka Platte; D Gareth Evans; Chris Jacobs; Julian Adlard; Marc Tischkowitz; Mary E Porteous; Francesca Damiola; Lisa Golmard; Laure Barjhoux; Michel Longy; Muriel Belotti; Sandra Fert Ferrer; Sylvie Mazoyer; Amanda B Spurdle; Siranoush Manoukian; Monica Barile; Maurizio Genuardi; Norbert Arnold; Alfons Meindl; Christian Sutter; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Susan M Domchek; Georg Pfeiler; Eitan Friedman; Uffe Birk Jensen; Mark Robson; Sohela Shah; Conxi Lazaro; Phuong L Mai; Javier Benitez; Melissa C Southey; Marjanka K Schmidt; Peter A Fasching; Julian Peto; Manjeet K Humphreys; Qin Wang; Kyriaki Michailidou; Elinor J Sawyer; Barbara Burwinkel; Pascal Guénel; Stig E Bojesen; Roger L Milne; Hermann Brenner; Magdalena Lochmann; Kristiina Aittomäki; Thilo Dörk; Sara Margolin; Arto Mannermaa; Diether Lambrechts; Jenny Chang-Claude; Paolo Radice; Graham G Giles; Christopher A Haiman; Robert Winqvist; Peter Devillee; Montserrat García-Closas; Nils Schoof; Maartje J Hooning; Angela Cox; Paul D P Pharoah; Anna Jakubowska; Nick Orr; Anna González-Neira; Guillermo Pita; M Rosario Alonso; Per Hall; Fergus J Couch; Jacques Simard; David Altshuler; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou; Kenneth Offit
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 5.917

10.  metagene Profiles Analyses Reveal Regulatory Element's Factor-Specific Recruitment Patterns.

Authors:  Charles Joly Beauparlant; Fabien C Lamaze; Astrid Deschênes; Rawane Samb; Audrey Lemaçon; Pascal Belleau; Steve Bilodeau; Arnaud Droit
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  9 in total

1.  Can chimerism explain breast/ovarian cancers in BRCA non-carriers from BRCA-positive families?

Authors:  Rachel Mitchell; Lela Buckingham; Melody Cobleigh; Jacob Rotmensch; Kelly Burgess; Lydia Usha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Response to Dr. Sorscher.

Authors:  Heidi Lumish; Wendy Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 3.  Genetic insights into the morass of metastatic heterogeneity.

Authors:  Kent W Hunter; Ruhul Amin; Sarah Deasy; Ngoc-Han Ha; Lalage Wakefield
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 4.  Higher order genomic organization and regulatory compartmentalization for cell cycle control at the G1/S-phase transition.

Authors:  Prachi N Ghule; David J Seward; Andrew J Fritz; Joseph R Boyd; Andre J van Wijnen; Jane B Lian; Janet L Stein; Gary S Stein
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 6.384

5.  Age at diagnosis of cancer in 185delAG BRCA1 mutation carriers of diverse ethnicities: tentative evidence for modifier factors.

Authors:  Yael Laitman; Rachel Michaelson-Cohen; Rakefet Chen-Shtoyerman; Yael Goldberg; Orit Reish; Rinat Bernstein-Molho; Ephrat Levy-Lahad; Noa Ephrat Ben Baruch; Inbal Kedar; D Gareth Evans; Sara Haim; Shani Paluch-Shimon; Eitan Friedman
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Functional Analysis of Promoter Variants in Genes Involved in Sex Steroid Action, DNA Repair and Cell Cycle Control.

Authors:  Yosr Hamdi; Martin Leclerc; Martine Dumont; Stéphane Dubois; Martine Tranchant; Guy Reimnitz; Penny Soucy; Pauline Cassart; Manon Ouimet; Daniel Sinnett; M'Hamed Lajmi Lakhal Chaieb; Jacques Simard
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 4.096

7.  Genome-wide association and epidemiological analyses reveal common genetic origins between uterine leiomyomata and endometriosis.

Authors:  C S Gallagher; N Mäkinen; H R Harris; N Rahmioglu; D I Chasman; S A Missmer; K T Zondervan; C C Morton; O Uimari; J P Cook; N Shigesi; T Ferreira; D R Velez-Edwards; T L Edwards; S Mortlock; Z Ruhioglu; F Day; C M Becker; V Karhunen; H Martikainen; M-R Järvelin; R M Cantor; P M Ridker; K L Terry; J E Buring; S D Gordon; S E Medland; G W Montgomery; D R Nyholt; D A Hinds; J Y Tung; J R B Perry; P A Lind; J N Painter; N G Martin; A P Morris
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 17.694

8.  Transformation-induced stress at telomeres is counteracted through changes in the telomeric proteome including SAMHD1.

Authors:  Jana Majerska; Marianna Feretzaki; Galina Glousker; Joachim Lingner
Journal:  Life Sci Alliance       Date:  2018-07-17

9.  Metabolic memory underlying minimal residual disease in breast cancer.

Authors:  Ksenija Radic Shechter; Eleni Kafkia; Katharina Zirngibl; Sylwia Gawrzak; Ashna Alladin; Daniel Machado; Christian Lüchtenborg; Daniel C Sévin; Britta Brügger; Kiran R Patil; Martin Jechlinger
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 11.429

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.