Brian T Helfand1, Haitao Chen2, Richard J Fantus3, Carly A Conran1, Charles B Brendler1, Siquan Lilly Zheng1, Patrick C Walsh4, William B Isaacs4, Jianfeng Xu1. 1. Division of Urology, John and Carol Walter for Urologic Health, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois. 2. School of Public Health, Fudan University, Center for Genomic Translational Medicine and Prevention, Shanghai, P.R. China. 3. Department of Surgery, Section of Urology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Department of Urology, James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Family history assigns equivalent risk to all relatives based upon the degree of relationship. Recent genetic studies have identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that can be used to calculate a genetic risk score (GRS) to determine prostate cancer (PCa) risk. We sought to determine whether GRS can stratify PCa risk among individuals in families considered to be at higher risk due their family history of PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Family members with hereditary PCa were recruited and genotyped for 17 SNPs associated with PCa. A GRS was calculated for all subjects. Analyses compared the distribution of GRS values among affected and unaffected family members of varying relationship degrees. RESULTS: Data was available for 789 family members of probands including 552 affected and 237 unaffected relatives. Median GRSs were higher among first-degree relatives compared to second- and third-degree relatives. In addition, GRS values among affected first- and second-degree relatives were significantly higher than unaffected relatives (P = 0.042 and P = 0.016, respectively). Multivariate analysis including GRS and degree of relationship demonstrated that GRS was a significant and independent predictor of PCa (OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.15-2.01). CONCLUSION: GRS is an easy-to-interpret, objective measure that can be used to assess differences in PCa risk among family members of affected men. GRS allows for further differentiation among family members, providing better risk assessment. While prospective validation studies are required, this information can help guide relatives in regards to the time of initiation and frequency of PCa screening.
PURPOSE: Family history assigns equivalent risk to all relatives based upon the degree of relationship. Recent genetic studies have identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that can be used to calculate a genetic risk score (GRS) to determine prostate cancer (PCa) risk. We sought to determine whether GRS can stratify PCa risk among individuals in families considered to be at higher risk due their family history of PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Family members with hereditary PCa were recruited and genotyped for 17 SNPs associated with PCa. A GRS was calculated for all subjects. Analyses compared the distribution of GRS values among affected and unaffected family members of varying relationship degrees. RESULTS: Data was available for 789 family members of probands including 552 affected and 237 unaffected relatives. Median GRSs were higher among first-degree relatives compared to second- and third-degree relatives. In addition, GRS values among affected first- and second-degree relatives were significantly higher than unaffected relatives (P = 0.042 and P = 0.016, respectively). Multivariate analysis including GRS and degree of relationship demonstrated that GRS was a significant and independent predictor of PCa (OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.15-2.01). CONCLUSION: GRS is an easy-to-interpret, objective measure that can be used to assess differences in PCa risk among family members of affected men. GRS allows for further differentiation among family members, providing better risk assessment. While prospective validation studies are required, this information can help guide relatives in regards to the time of initiation and frequency of PCa screening.
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Stephan Madersbacher; Antonio Alcaraz; Mark Emberton; Peter Hammerer; Anton Ponholzer; Fritz H Schröder; Andrea Tubaro Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-12-16 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Peter R Carroll; J Kellogg Parsons; Gerald Andriole; Robert R Bahnson; Daniel A Barocas; William J Catalona; Douglas M Dahl; John W Davis; Jonathan I Epstein; Ruth B Etzioni; Veda N Giri; George P Hemstreet; Mark H Kawachi; Paul H Lange; Kevin R Loughlin; William Lowrance; Paul Maroni; James Mohler; Todd M Morgan; Robert B Nadler; Michael Poch; Chuck Scales; Terrence M Shanefelt; Andrew J Vickers; Robert Wake; Dorothy A Shead; Maria Ho Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Ali Amin Al Olama; Sara Benlloch; Antonis C Antoniou; Graham G Giles; Gianluca Severi; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan; Kenneth Muir; Johanna Schleutker; Brian E Henderson; Christopher A Haiman; Fredrick R Schumacher; Nora Pashayan; Paul D P Pharoah; Elaine A Ostrander; Janet L Stanford; Jyotsna Batra; Judith A Clements; Suzanne K Chambers; Maren Weischer; Børge G Nordestgaard; Sue A Ingles; Karina D Sorensen; Torben F Orntoft; Jong Y Park; Cezary Cybulski; Christiane Maier; Thilo Doerk; Joanne L Dickinson; Lisa Cannon-Albright; Hermann Brenner; Timothy R Rebbeck; Charnita Zeigler-Johnson; Tomonori Habuchi; Stephen N Thibodeau; Kathleen A Cooney; Pierre O Chappuis; Pierre Hutter; Radka P Kaneva; William D Foulkes; Maurice P Zeegers; Yong-Jie Lu; Hong-Wei Zhang; Robert Stephenson; Angela Cox; Melissa C Southey; Amanda B Spurdle; Liesel FitzGerald; Daniel Leongamornlert; Edward Saunders; Malgorzata Tymrakiewicz; Michelle Guy; Tokhir Dadaev; Sarah J Little; Koveela Govindasami; Emma Sawyer; Rosemary Wilkinson; Kathleen Herkommer; John L Hopper; Aritaya Lophatonanon; Antje E Rinckleb; Zsofia Kote-Jarai; Rosalind A Eeles; Douglas F Easton Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: A Karim Kader; Jielin Sun; Brian H Reck; Paul J Newcombe; Seong-Tae Kim; Fang-Chi Hsu; Ralph B D'Agostino; Sha Tao; Zheng Zhang; Aubrey R Turner; Greg T Platek; Colin F Spraggs; John C Whittaker; Brian R Lane; William B Isaacs; Deborah A Meyers; Eugene R Bleecker; Frank M Torti; Jeffery M Trent; John D McConnell; S Lilly Zheng; Lynn D Condreay; Roger S Rittmaster; Jianfeng Xu Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-05-12 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ali Amin Al Olama; Tokhir Dadaev; Dennis J Hazelett; Qiuyan Li; Daniel Leongamornlert; Edward J Saunders; Sarah Stephens; Clara Cieza-Borrella; Ian Whitmore; Sara Benlloch Garcia; Graham G Giles; Melissa C Southey; Liesel Fitzgerald; Henrik Gronberg; Fredrik Wiklund; Markus Aly; Brian E Henderson; Fredrick Schumacher; Christopher A Haiman; Johanna Schleutker; Tiina Wahlfors; Teuvo L Tammela; Børge G Nordestgaard; Tim J Key; Ruth C Travis; David E Neal; Jenny L Donovan; Freddie C Hamdy; Paul Pharoah; Nora Pashayan; Kay-Tee Khaw; Janet L Stanford; Stephen N Thibodeau; Shannon K Mcdonnell; Daniel J Schaid; Christiane Maier; Walther Vogel; Manuel Luedeke; Kathleen Herkommer; Adam S Kibel; Cezary Cybulski; Dominika Wokołorczyk; Wojciech Kluzniak; Lisa Cannon-Albright; Hermann Brenner; Katja Butterbach; Volker Arndt; Jong Y Park; Thomas Sellers; Hui-Yi Lin; Chavdar Slavov; Radka Kaneva; Vanio Mitev; Jyotsna Batra; Judith A Clements; Amanda Spurdle; Manuel R Teixeira; Paula Paulo; Sofia Maia; Hardev Pandha; Agnieszka Michael; Andrzej Kierzek; Koveela Govindasami; Michelle Guy; Artitaya Lophatonanon; Kenneth Muir; Ana Viñuela; Andrew A Brown; Mathew Freedman; David V Conti; Douglas Easton; Gerhard A Coetzee; Rosalind A Eeles; Zsofia Kote-Jarai Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Jennifer L Beebe-Dimmer; Ashley L Kapron; Alison M Fraser; Ken R Smith; Kathleen A Cooney Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-03-24 Impact factor: 44.544