Search

Contains fulltext : 237666.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVE: To contribute to the debate regarding the minimum volume of radical cystectomies (RCs) that a hospital should perform by evaluating the association between hospital volume (HV) and postoperative mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent RC for bladder cancer between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2018 were retrospectively identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. To create a calendar-year independent measure, the HV of RCs was calculated per patient by counting the RCs performed in the same hospital in the 12 months preceding surgery. The relationship of HV with 30- and 90-day mortality was assessed by logistic regression with a non-linear spline function for HV as a continuous variable, which was adjusted for age, tumour, node and metastasis (TNM) stage, and neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range; range) HV among the 9287 RC-treated patients was 19 (12-27; 1-75). Of all the included patients, 208 (2.2%) and 518 (5.6%) died within 30 and 90 days after RC, respectively. After adjustment for age, TNM stage and neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative mortality slightly increased between an HV of 0 and an HV of 25 RCs and steadily decreased from an HV of 30 onwards. The lowest risks of postoperative mortality were observed for the highest volumes. CONCLUSION: This paper, based on high-quality data from a large nationwide population-based cohort, suggests that increasing the RC volume criteria beyond 30 RCs annually could further decrease postoperative mortality. Based on these results, the volume criterion of 20 RCs annually, as recently recommended by the European Association of Urology Guideline Panel, might therefore be reconsidered.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Grading prostate biopsies has an important role in determining treatment strategy. Histopathological evaluations suffer from interobserver variability and therefore biopsies may be re-evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into the extent of, characteristics associated with and clinical implications of prostate biopsy re-evaluations in daily clinical practice. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) by biopsy between October 2015 and April 2016 identified through the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included. The proportion of re-evaluations was assessed and characteristics were compared between patients with and without biopsy re-evaluation. Interobserver concordance of ISUP grade and EAU prognostic risk classification was determined by calculating Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Biopsy re-evaluation was performed in 172 (3.3%) of 5214 patients. Primary reason for re-evaluation in patients treated with curative intent was referral to another hospital. Most referred patients treated with curative intent (n = 1856) had no re-evaluation (93.0%, n = 1727). Patients with biopsy re-evaluation were younger and underwent more often prostatectomy compared to patients without re-evaluation. The disagreement rate for ISUP grade was 26.1% and interobserver concordance was substantial (κ-weighted = 0.74). Re-evaluation resulted in 21.1% (n = 14) of patients with localised PCa in a different prognostic risk group. More tumours were downgraded (57.1%) than upgraded (42.9%). Interobserver concordance was very good (κ (weighted) = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Pathology review of prostate biopsies is infrequently requested by clinicians in the Netherlands but in a non-negligible minority of patients with localised PCa the pathology review led to a change in prognostic risk group which might impact their treatment.

Background: A substantial proportion of cancer driver genes (CDG) are also cancer predisposition genes. However, the associations between genetic variants in lung CDGs and the susceptibility to lung cancer have rarely been investigated. Methods: We selected expression-related single-nucleotide polymorphisms (eSNP) and nonsynonymous variants of lung CDGs, and tested their associations with lung cancer risk in two large-scale genome-wide association studies (20,871 cases and 15,971 controls of European descent). Conditional and joint association analysis was performed to identify independent risk variants. The associations of independent risk variants with somatic alterations in lung CDGs or recurrently altered pathways were investigated using data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project. Results: We identified seven independent SNPs in five lung CDGs that were consistently associated with lung cancer risk in discovery (P < 0.001) and validation (P < 0.05) stages. Among these loci, rs78062588 in TPM3 (1q21.3) was a new lung cancer susceptibility locus (OR = 0.86, P = 1.65 × 10−6). Subgroup analysis by histologic types further identified nine lung CDGs. Analysis of somatic alterations found that in lung adenocarcinomas, rs78062588[C] allele (TPM3 in 1q21.3) was associated with elevated somatic copy number of TPM3 (OR = 1.16, P = 0.02). In lung adenocarcinomas, rs1611182 (HLA-A in 6p22.1) was associated with truncation mutations of the transcriptional misregulation in cancer pathway (OR = 0.66, P = 1.76 × 10−3). Conclusions: Genetic variants can regulate functions of lung CDGs and influence lung cancer susceptibility. Impact: Our findings might help unravel biological mechanisms underlying lung cancer susceptibility.

Background: Papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (PUN-LMP) was introduced as a noninvasive, noncancerous lesion and a separate grade category in 1998. Subsequently, PUN-LMP was reconfirmed by World Health Organization (WHO) 2004 and WHO 2016 classifications for urothelial bladder tumors. Objectives: To analyze the proportion of PUN-LMP diagnosis over time and to determine its prognostic value compared to Ta-LG (low-grade) and Ta-HG (high-grade) carcinomas. To assess the intraobserver variability of an experienced uropathologist assigning (WHO) 2004/2016 grades at 2 time points. Materials and methods: Individual patient data of 3,311 primary Ta bladder tumors from 17 hospitals in Europe and Canada were available. Transurethral resection of the tumor was performed between 1990 and 2018. Time to recurrence and progression were analyzed with cumulative incidence functions, log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression stratified by institution. Intraobserver variability was assessed by examining the same 314 transurethral resection of the tumorslides twice, in 2004 and again in 2018. Results: PUN-LMP represented 3.8% (127/3,311) of Ta tumors. The same pathologist found 71/314 (22.6%) PUN-LMPs in 2004 and only 20/314 (6.4%) in 2018. Overall, the proportion of PUN-LMP diagnosis substantially decreased over time from 31.3% (1990-2000) to 3.2% (2000-2010) and to 1.1% (2010-2018). We found no difference in time to recurrence between the three WHO 2004/2016 Ta-grade categories (log-rank, P = 0.381), nor for LG vs. PUN-LMP (log-rank, P = 0.238). Time to progression was different for all grade categories (log-rank, P < 0.001), but not between LG and PUN-LMP (log-rank, P = 0.096). Multivariable analyses on recurrence and progression showed similar results for all 3 grade categories and for LG vs. PUN-LMP. Conclusions: The proportion of PUN-LMP has decreased to very low levels in the last decade. Contrary to its reconfirmation in the WHO 2016 classification, our results do not support the continued use of PUN-LMP as a separate grade category in Ta tumors because of the similar prognosis for PUN-LMP and Ta-LG carcinomas. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: Testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT), histologically classified as seminomas and nonseminomas, are believed to arise from primordial gonocytes, with the maturation process blocked when they are subjected to DNA methylation reprogramming. SNPs in DNA methylation machinery and folate-dependent one-carbon metabolism genes have been postulated to influence the proper establishment of DNA methylation. Methods: In this pathway-focused investigation, we evaluated the association between 273 selected tag SNPs from 28 DNA methylation–related genes and TGCT risk. We carried out association analysis at individual SNP and gene-based level using summary statistics from the Genome Wide Association Study meta-analysis recently conducted by the international Testicular Cancer Consortium on 10,156 TGCT cases and 179,683 controls. Results: In individual SNP analyses, seven SNPs, four mapping within MTHFR, were associated with TGCT risk after correction for multiple testing (q ≤ 0.05). Queries of public databases showed that three of these SNPs were associated with MTHFR changes in enzymatic activity (rs1801133) or expression level in testis tissue (rs12121543, rs1476413). Gene-based analyses revealed MTHFR (q = 8.4 × 10–4), methyl-CpG–binding protein 2 (MECP2; q = 2 × 10–3), and ZBTB4 (q = 0.03) as the top TGCT-associated genes. Stratifying by tumor histology, four MTHFR SNPs were associated with seminoma. In gene-based analysis MTHFR was associated with risk of seminoma (q = 2.8 × 10–4), but not with nonseminomatous tumors (q = 0.22). Conclusions: Genetic variants within MTHFR, potentially having an impact on the DNA methylation pattern, are associated with TGCT risk. Impact: This finding suggests that TGCT pathogenesis could be associated with the folate cycle status, and this relation could be partly due to hereditary factors.

Differences by sex in lung cancer incidence and mortality have been reported which cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior, implying existence of genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development. However, the information about sex dimorphism in lung cancer risk is quite limited despite the great success in lung cancer association studies. By adopting a stringent two-stage analysis strategy, we performed a genome-wide gene–sex interaction analysis using genotypes from a lung cancer cohort including ~ 47 000 individuals with European ancestry. Three low-frequency variants (minor allele frequency

Background: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is characterized by frequent recurrences and a risk of progression in stage and grade. Increased knowledge of underlying biological mechanisms is needed.Objective: To identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with recurrence-free (RFS) and progression-free (PFS) survival in NMIBC.Design, setting, and participants: We analyzed outcome data from 3400 newly diagnosed NMIBC patients from the Netherlands, the UK, Canada, and Spain. We generated genome-wide germline SNP data using Illumina OmniExpress and Infinium Global Screening Array in combination with genotype imputation.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cohort-specific genome-wide association studies (GWASs) for RFS and PFS were performed using a Cox proportional hazard model. Results were combined in a fixed-effect inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis. Candidate genes for the identified SNP associations were prioritized using functional annotation, gene-based analysis, expression quantitative trait locus analysis, and transcription factor binding site databases. Tumor expression levels of prioritized genes were tested for association with RFS and PFS in an independent NMIBC cohort.Results and limitations: This meta-analysis revealed a genome-wide significant locus for RFS on chromosome 14 (lead SNP rs12885353, hazard ratio [HR] C vs T allele 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-1.82, p = 4.0 x 10(-8)), containing genes G2E3 and SCFD1. Higher expression of SCFD1 was associated with increased RFS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84, p(FDR) = 0.003). Twelve other loci were suggestively associated with RFS (p < 10(-5)), pointing toward 18 additional candidate genes. For PFS, ten loci showed suggestive evidence of association, indicating 36 candidate genes. Expression levels of ten of these genes were statistically significantly associated with PFS, of which four (IFT140, UBE2I, FAHD1, and NME3) showed directional consistency with our meta-analysis results and published literature.Conclusions: In this first prognostic GWAS in NMIBC, we identified several novel candidate loci and five genes that showed convincing associations with recurrence or progression.Patient summary: In this study, we searched for inherited DNA changes that affect the outcome of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). We identified several genes that are associated with disease recurrence and progression. The roles and mechanisms of these genes in NMIBC prognosis should be investigated in future studies. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology.

Contains fulltext : 244184.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) INTRODUCTION: Body composition has been associated with disease outcome in several cancer types. Results for localized and metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) are limited and inconsistent. Our aim was to examine the association between body composition and survival in RCC. METHODS: We conducted a population-based historical cohort study including patients diagnosed with RCC from 2008 to 2012. Diagnostic Computed Tomography images at the third lumbar vertebra (L3) were assessed for skeletal muscle index (SMI), skeletal muscle density (SMD), visceral adipose tissue index (VATI) and subcutaneous adipose tissue index (SATI). Clinical data was retrieved from medical records. Multivariable Cox regressions with restricted cubic splines were used to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for 10-unit increases in body composition features with overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: We included 719 stage I-III (of whom 254 (35.3%) died and 148 (21.9%) experienced recurrence) and 320 stage IV RCC patients (of whom 298 (93.1%) died). Median follow-up was 6.35 years (interquartile range; 1.41-8.23). For stage I-III, higher SMD was associated with better OS (men: HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.68-1.08; women: HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.95). Lower compared to median VATI was associated with worse OS for both men (HR 1.38; 95%CI 1.05-1.83 for VATI = 25) and women (HR 1.67; 95%CI 1.01-2.78 for VATI = 20). For stage IV, higher SMD and higher VATI were associated with better OS among men (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.59-0.94 and HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.88-0.99, respectively). Results for women were similar but non-significant. No statistically significant associations were found for SMI or SATI. CONCLUSION: Higher SMD and higher VATI were marginally associated with better survival in RCC patients and might be useful for better prognostication. However, the added value to current prognostic scores needs to be investigated.

Contains fulltext : 251728.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 outbreak has affected care for non-COVID diseases like cancer. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on prostate cancer care in the Netherlands. METHODS: Prostate cancer diagnoses per month in 2020-2021 versus 2018-2019 were compared based on preliminary data of the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and nationwide pathology network. Detailed data was retrieved from the NCR for the cohorts diagnosed from March-May 2020 (first COVID-19 wave) and March-May 2018-2019 (reference). Changes in number of diagnoses, age, disease stage and first-line treatment were compared. RESULTS: An initial decline of 17% in prostate cancer diagnoses during the first COVID-19 wave was observed. From May onwards the number of diagnoses started to restore to approximately 95% of the expected number by the end of 2020. Stage at diagnosis remainedstable over time. In low-risk localised prostate cancer radical prostatectomy was conducted more often in week 9-12 (21% versus 12% in the reference period; OR=1.9, 95% CI; 1.2-3.1) and less active surveillance was applied (67% versus 78%; OR=0.6, 95% CI; 0.4-0.9). In the intermediate-risk group, a similar change was observed in week 13-16. Radical prostatectomy volumes in 2020 were comparable to 2018-2019. CONCLUSION: During the first COVID-19 wave the number of prostate cancer diagnoses declined. In the second half of 2020 this largely restored although the number remained lower than expected. Changes in treatment were temporary and compliant with adapted guidelines. Although delayed diagnoses could result in a less favourable stage distribution, possibly affecting survival, this seems not very likely.

BackgroundFamilial clustering of melanoma suggests a shared genetic predisposition among family members, but only 10%–40% of familial cases carry a pathogenic variant in a known high-risk melanoma susceptibility gene. We investigated whether a melanoma-specific Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) is associated with melanoma risk in patients with genetically unexplained familial melanoma.MethodsDutch familial melanoma cases (n=418) were genotyped for 46 SNPs previously identified as independently associated with melanoma risk. The 46-SNP PRS was calculated and standardised to 3423 healthy controls (sPRS) and the association between PRS and melanoma risk was modelled using logistic regression. Within the case series, possible differences were further explored by investigating the PRS in relation to (1) the number of primary melanomas in a patient and (2) the extent of familial clustering of melanoma.ResultsThe PRS was significantly associated with melanoma risk, with a per-SD OR of 2.12 (95% CI 1.90 to 2.35, pConclusionOur work underlines the significance of a PRS in determining melanoma susceptibility and encourages further exploration of the diagnostic value of a PRS in genetically unexplained melanoma families.

Contains fulltext : 225403.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Bladder cancer is among the top ten most common cancer types in the world, with approximately 550,000 new cases annually. The highest burden of bladder cancer is currently falling on most developed communities across the globe. But with an anticipated shift in world demographics with growing and aging populations mainly on the African continent, and important shifts in exposure to different risk factors across the world, this is likely to change over the next decades. In this review, we provide an overview of the current incidence, mortality, prevalence, survival, risk factors and costs of bladder cancer worldwide.

L.K. is a fellow in the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategic Training in Advanced Genetic Epidemiology (STAGE) programme and is supported by the CIHR Doctoral Research Award from the Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships (GSD-137441). Transdisciplinary Research for Cancer in Lung (TRICL) of the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) was supported by the National Institutes of Health (U19-CA148127, CA148127S1). Genotyping for the TRICL-ILCCO OncoArray was supported by in-kind genotyping at Centre for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) (26820120008i-0–6800068-1). Genotyping for the Head and Neck Cancer OncoArray performed at CIDR was funded by the US National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) grant 1X01HG007780–0. CAPUA study was supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03–0365 and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02–67 and FICYT IB09–133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA), of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiologia y Salud Publica. CIBERESP, SPAIN. The work performed in the CARET study was supported by the National Institute of Health (NIH)/National Cancer Institute (NCI): UM1 CA167462 (PI: Goodman), National Institute of Health UO1-CA6367307 (PIs Omen, Goodman); National Institute of Health R01 CA111703 (PI Chen), National Institute of Health 5R01 CA151989 (PI Doherty). The Liverpool Lung Project is supported by the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation. The Harvard Lung Cancer Study was supported by the NIH (National Cancer Institute) grants CA092824, CA090578 and CA074386. The Multiethnic Cohort Study was partially supported by NIH Grants CA164973, CA033619, CA63464 and CA148127. The work performed in MSH-PMH study was supported by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (020214), Ontario Institute of Cancer and Cancer Care Ontario Chair Award to R.J.H. and G.L. and the Alan Brown Chair and Lusi Wong Programs at the Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation. The Norway study was supported by Norwegian Cancer Society, Norwegian Research Council. The work in TLC study has been supported in part the James & Esther King Biomedical Research Program (09KN-15), National Institutes of Health Specialized Programs of Research Excellence (SPORE) Grant (P50 CA119997) and by a Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (grant number P30-CA76292). The dataset(s) used for the analyses described were obtained from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s BioVU, which is supported by institutional funding and by the Vanderbilt CTSA grant UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH. Dr Melinda Aldrich is supported by the by NIH/National Cancer Institute 5K07CA172294. The Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS) was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev Hospital. The NELCS study: Grant Number P20RR018787 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Kentucky Lung Cancer Research Initiative (KLCRI) was supported by the Department of Defense (Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Program) under award number: 10153006 (W81XWH-11–1-0781). Views and opinions of, and endorsements by the author(s) do not reflect those of the US Army or the Department of Defense. This research was also supported by unrestricted infrastructure funds from the UK Center for Clinical and Translational Science, NIH grant UL1TR000117 and Markey Cancer Center NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA177558) Shared Resource Facilities: Cancer Research Informatics, Biospecimen and Tissue Procurement, and Biostatistics and Bioinformatics. The research undertaken by M.D.T., L.V.W. and M.S.A. was partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. M.D.T. holds a Medical Research Council Senior Clinical Fellowship (G0902313). The Tampa study was funded by Public Health Service grants P01-CA68384 and R01-DE13158 from the National Institutes of Health. The University of Pittsburgh head and neck cancer case–control study is supported by US National Institutes of Health grants P50 CA097190 and P30 CA047904. The Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE) was supported by the National Cancer Institute (R01CA90731). The Head and Neck Genome Project (GENCAPO) was supported by the Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP; grants 04/12054–9 and 10/51168–0). The authors thank all the members of the GENCAPO team. This publication presents data from the Head and Neck 5000 study. The study was a component of independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (RP-PG-0707–10034). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Human papillomavirus (HPV) serology was supported by a Cancer Research UK Programme Grant, the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme (grant number: C18281/A19169). The Alcohol-Related Cancers and Genetic Susceptibility Study in Europe (ARCAGE) was funded by the European Commission’s fifth framework programme (QLK1– 2001-00182), the Italian Association for Cancer Research, Compagnia di San Paolo/FIRMS, Region Piemonte and Padova University (CPDA057222). The Rome Study was supported by the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) awards IG 2011 10491 and IG 2013 14220 to S.B. and by Fondazione Veronesi to S.B. The IARC Latin American study was funded by the European Commission INCO-DC programme (IC18-CT97–0222), with additional funding from Fondo para la Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (Argentina) and the Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (01/01768–2). The IARC Central Europe study was supported by the European Commission’s INCO-COPERNICUS Program (IC15-CT98–0332), US NIH/National Cancer Institute grant CA92039 and World Cancer Research Foundation grant WCRF 99A28. The IARC Oral Cancer Multicenter study was funded by grant S06 96 202489 05F02 from Europe against Cancer; grants FIS 97/0024, FIS 97/0662 and BAE 01/5013 from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Spain; the UICC Yamagiwa-Yoshida Memorial International Cancer Study; the National Cancer Institute of Canada; Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro; and the Pan-American Health Organization. Coordination of the EPIC study is financially supported by the European Commission (DG SANCO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Objectives It has consistently been shown that women who are diagnosed with bladder cancer have lower survival than men, but the exact mechanism remains unknown. Most studies assumed that the sex-specific mortality ratio is constant over time, possibly resulting in inaccurate estimates in various periods of follow-up. This study aimed to investigate the sex-specific excess mortality in bladder cancer patients and its variation over follow-up time. Methods Observational cohort study. Using data from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry, we studied 24,169 patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2014 with histologically confirmed ≥T1 bladder cancer with follow-up until January 2018. We used flexible parametric relative survival models to estimate excess mortality as a function of time for each sex and to explore the effect of covariates on these functions. Results Female patients (24%) had worse clinical tumor, node, and metastasis-stage at diagnosis and more often a nonurothelial tumor histology. The excess mortality ratio of sex was not constant over time; in the first two years after diagnosis excess mortality rates for women were higher than for men, but lower thereafter; this applied to both nonmuscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder cancer subgroups. Baseline differences in age, tumor, node, and metastasis-stage and histology accounted for only part of the excess mortality gap. Conclusions The assumption of proportional hazards over time leads to underestimation of the excess mortality ratio for women in the first two years and overestimation thereafter, when excess mortality is comparable for women and men. Clinicians should incorporate the initial sex-specific poorer outcome in their considerations regarding prognosis and treatment options for female patients, e.g., more invasive treatment and neo-adjuvant treatment. These findings also point towards a mechanism of micrometastatic disease, warranting assessment of sex-specific efficacy in randomized controlled trials on treatments in this patient population.

BACKGROUND: According to (inter-)national guidelines, (neo-)adjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is optional for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients and is the recommended standard treatment for high-risk PCa patients.OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide insight into the prescription of ADT in intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT in the Netherlands, and to evaluate adherence to European Association of Urology guidelines and factors affecting prescription.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients between October 2015 and April 2016 were identified through the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Variation in the prescription of ADT in patients with EBRT was evaluated. Multivariable multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the probability of ADT and to examine the role of patient-, tumour-, and hospital-related factors.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 29% of patients with intermediate-risk PCa received ADT varying from 3% to 73% between institutions. From the multivariable regression analysis, higher Gleason grade, magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography (CT)-positron-emission tomography/CT prior to radiotherapy appeared to be associated with increased prescription of ADT. Among high-risk patients, 83% received ADT, varying from 57% to 100% between departments. A higher prostate-specific antigen level, more advanced tumour stage, and a higher Gleason grade were associated with increased prescription.CONCLUSIONS: Less than one-third of intermediate-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT receive ADT. The variation in the prescription of ADT between different institutions is substantial. This suggests that the prescription is largely dependent on different institutional policies. The guideline adherence in high-risk PCa is fairly good, as the vast majority of patients received ADT as recommended. However, given the clear recommendations in the guidelines, adherence could be improved.PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we looked at the variation of hormonal treatment in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients. We found substantial variation between institutions.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death globally. An improved risk stratification strategy can increase efficiency of low-dose CT (LDCT) screening. Here we assessed whether individual's genetic background has clinical utility for risk stratification in the context of LDCT screening. On the basis of 13,119 patients with lung cancer and 10,008 controls with European ancestry in the International Lung Cancer Consortium, we constructed a polygenic risk score (PRS) via 10-fold cross-validation with regularized penalized regression. The performance of risk model integrating PRS, including calibration and ability to discriminate, was assessed using UK Biobank data (N = 335,931). Absolute risk was estimated on the basis of age-specific lung cancer incidence and all-cause mortality as competing risk. To evaluate its potential clinical utility, the PRS distribution was simulated in the National Lung Screening Trial (N = 50,772 participants). The lung cancer ORs for individuals at the top decile of the PRS distribution versus those at bottom 10% was 2.39 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.92–3.00; P = 1.80 × 10−14] in the validation set (Ptrend = 5.26 × 10−20). The OR per SD of PRS increase was 1.26 (95% CI = 1.20–1.32; P = 9.69 × 10−23) for overall lung cancer risk in the validation set. When considering absolute risks, individuals at different PRS deciles showed differential trajectories of 5-year and cumulative absolute risk. The age reaching the LDCT screening recommendation threshold can vary by 4 to 8 years, depending on the individual's genetic background, smoking status, and family history. Collectively, these results suggest that individual's genetic background may inform the optimal lung cancer LDCT screening strategy. Significance: Three large-scale datasets reveal that, after accounting for risk factors, an individual's genetics can affect their lung cancer risk trajectory, thus may inform the optimal timing for LDCT screening.

Contains fulltext : 229162.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) OBJECTIVES: Radical cystectomies (RCs) are increasingly centralized, but bladder cancer can be diagnosed in every hospital The aim of this study is to assess the variation between hospitals of diagnosis in a patient's chance to undergo a RC before and after the volume criteria for RCs, to identify factors associated with this variation and to assess its effect on survival. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients diagnosed with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (cT2-4a,N0/X,M0/X) without nodal or distant metastases between 2008 and 2016 were identified through the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the hospital specific probability of undergoing a cystectomy. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to assess the case-mix adjusted effect of hospital-specific probabilities on survival. RESULTS: Of the 9,215 included patients, 4,513 (49%) underwent a RC. The percentage of RCs varied between 7% and 83% by hospital of diagnosis before the introduction of the first volume criteria (i.e., 2008-2009; minimum of 10 RCs). This variation decreased slightly to 17%-77% after establishment of the second volume criteria (i.e., 2015-2016; minimum of 20 RCs). Age, cT-stage and comorbidity were inversely and socioeconomic status was positively associated with RC. Both being diagnosed in a community hospital and/or being diagnosed in a hospital fulfilling the RC volume criteria were associated with increased use of RC compared to academic hospitals and hospitals not fulfilling the volume criteria. For each 10% increase in the percentage of RC in the hospital of diagnosis, 2-year case-mix adjusted survival increased 4% (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.94-0.98). CONCLUSION: Probability of RC varied between hospitals of diagnosis and affected 2-year overall survival. Undergoing a RC was associated with age, cT-stage, socioeconomic status, type of hospital, and whether the hospital of diagnosis fulfilled the RC volume criteria. Future research is needed to identify patient, tumor, and hospital characteristics affecting utilization of curative treatment as this may benefit overall survival.

Testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) are the most common tumor in young white men and have a high heritability. In this study, the international Testicular Cancer Consortium assemble 10,156 and 179,683 men with and without TGCT, respectively, for a genome-wide association study. This meta-analysis identifies 22 TGCT susceptibility loci, bringing the total to 78, which account for 44% of disease heritability. Men with a polygenic risk score (PRS) in the 95th percentile have a 6.8-fold increased risk of TGCT compared to men with median scores. Among men with independent TGCT risk factors such as cryptorchidism, the PRS may guide screening decisions with the goal of reducing treatment-related complications causing long-term morbidity in survivors. These findings emphasize the interconnected nature of two known pathways that promote TGCT susceptibility: male germ cell development within its somatic niche and regulation of chromosomal division and structure, and implicate an additional biological pathway, mRNA translation., Testicular germ cell tumors are highly heritable, and the authors present the largest genome association study, identifying 22 novel loci, which account for a third of those identified to date. Implicated pathways include male germ cell development and differentiation, and chromosomal segregation.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common, highly heritable neuropsychiatric disorder. ADHD often co-occurs with intellectual disability, and shared overlapping genetics have been suggested. The aim of this study was to identify novel ADHD genes by investigating whether genes carrying rare mutations linked to intellectual disability contribute to ADHD risk through common genetic variants. Validation and characterization of candidates were performed usingCommon genetic variants in a diagnostic gene panel of 396 autosomal intellectual disability genes were tested for association with ADHD risk through gene set and gene-wide analyses, using ADHD meta-analytic data from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium for discovery (N=19,210) and ADHD data from the Lundbeck Foundation Initiative for Integrative Psychiatric Research for replication (N=37,076). The significant genes were functionally validated and characterized inThe intellectual disability gene set was significantly associated with ADHD risk in the discovery and replication data sets. The three genes most consistently associated wereThis study reveals that a large set of intellectual disability-related genes contribute to ADHD risk through effects of common alleles. Utilizing this continuity, the authors identified

This research was supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health (US NCI R25T CA112355 and R01 CA201358; PI: Witte) and the Canadian Institute for Health Research (Foundation grant FDN 167273, PI: Hung; Canada Research Chair, PI: Hung). The OncoArray project was supported by NIH U19 CA203654 (MPI: Hung, Amos, Brennan, Lin). The Boston Lung Cancer Study was funded by NIH (NCI) U01CA209414 (PI: Christiani). The lung eQTL study at Laval University was supported by the Fondation de l’Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP − 123369). Y.B. holds a Canada Research Chair in Genomics of Heart and Lung Diseases. The EAGLE study was supported by the Intramural Research Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS. The Multiethnic Cohort Study is supported by National Institutes of Health (CA164973). The CARET study was supported by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute: UM1 CA167462 (PI: Goodman), U01 CA6367307 (PIs: Omen, Goodman); R01 CA111703 (PI: Chen), 5R01 CA151989-01A1 (PI: Doherty) and U01 CA167462 (PI: Chen). M.B.S. was supported in part by a Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA076292) and by NIH P50 CA119997. R.M.M. is supported by a CRUK programme grant, the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme (C18281/A19169), and by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Bristol Biomedical Research Centre based at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol., Kachuri, L., Johansson, M., Rashkin, S.R., Graff, R.E., Bossé, Y., Manem, V., Caporaso, N.E., Landi, M.T., Christiani, D.C., Vineis, P., Liu, G., Scelo, G., Zaridze, D., Shete, S.S., Albanes, D., Aldrich, M.C., Tardón, A., Rennert, G., Chen, C., Goodman, G.E., Doherty, J.A., Bickeböller, H., Field, J.K., Davies, M.P., Dawn Teare, M., Kiemeney, L.A., Bojesen, S.E., Haugen, A., Zienolddiny, S., Lam, S., Le Marchand, L., Cheng, I., Schabath, M.B., Duell, E.J., Andrew, A.S., Manjer, J., Lazarus, P., Arnold, S., McKay, J.D., Emami, N.C., Warkentin, M.T., Brhane, Y., Obeidat, M., Martin, R.M., Relton, C., Davey Smith, G., Haycock, P.C., Amos, C.I., Brennan, P., Witte, J.S., Hung, R.J.

Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified at least 10 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) risk. Most of these SNPs are common variants with small to moderate effect sizes. Here we assessed the combined genetic effects of these variants on PTC risk by using summarized GWAS results to build polygenic risk score (PRS) models in three PTC study groups from Ohio (1,544 patients and 1,593 controls), Iceland (723 patients and 129,556 controls), and the United Kingdom (534 patients and 407,945 controls). A PRS based on the 10 established PTC SNPs showed a stronger predictive power compared with the clinical factors model, with a minimum increase of area under the receiver-operating curve of 5.4 percentage points ( P ≤ 1.0 × 10 −9 ). Adding an extended PRS based on 592,475 common variants did not significantly improve the prediction power compared with the 10-SNP model, suggesting that most of the remaining undiscovered genetic risk in thyroid cancer is due to rare, moderate- to high-penetrance variants rather than to common low-penetrance variants. Based on the 10-SNP PRS, individuals in the top decile group of PRSs have a close to sevenfold greater risk (95% CI, 5.4–8.8) compared with the bottom decile group. In conclusion, PRSs based on a small number of common germline variants emphasize the importance of heritable low-penetrance markers in PTC.

Background Concerns have been raised about the accessibility and quality of cancer‐related care for people with intellectual disabilities (ID). However, there is limited insight into cancer incidence and the utilization of cancer care at the ID population level to inform targeted cancer control strategies. Therefore, we aimed to examine differences in the utilization of cancer‐related care between people with and without ID, identified through diagnostic codes on health insurance claims. Methods In a population‐based cohort study, Dutch individuals of all ages who received residential care through the Chronic Care Act due to an ID (n = 65 183) and an age and sex‐matched sample of persons without ID (1:2 ratio), who were cancer‐free at enrollment in 2013 were followed through 2015. Incidence rates (IRs) of newly started cancer care and IR ratios (IRRs) with 95% CIs were used to compare groups. Separate analyses were performed per cancer type. Results Individuals with ID received less cancer‐related care than individuals without (IRR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.62‐0.66). Differences increased with age and were larger for females than for males. Utilization of care for cancers within the national screening program (female breast, cervical, and colon cancer) was lower for people with ID compared to people without ID. Conclusion Cancer may be underdiagnosed and/or undertreated in people with ID, or cancer is truly less prevalent in this population. In particular, the differences detected between males and females with ID, and the potential underutilization of national screening programs, require urgent follow‐up investigations., Individuals with an intellectual disability (ID) were given less cancer‐related health care than people without ID. This could indicate cancer is under‐diagnosed and/or under‐treated in people with ID.

The CAPUA study was supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03-0365, and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02-67 and FICYT IB09-133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA), of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiologia y Salud Pública. CIBERESP, SPAIN (...), Ji, X., Mukherjee, S., Landi, M.T., Bosse, Y., Joubert, P., Zhu, D., Gorlov, I., Xiao, X., Han, Y., Gorlova, O., Hung, R.J., Brhane, Y., Carreras-Torres, R., Christiani, D.C., Caporaso, N., Johansson, M., Liu, G., Bojesen, S.E., Le Marchand, L., Albanes, D., Bickeböller, H., Aldrich, M.C., Bush, W.S., Tardon, A., Rennert, G., Chen, C., Byun, J., Dragnev, K.H., Field, J.K., Kiemeney, L.F., Lazarus, P., Zienolddiny, S., Lam, S., Schabath, M.B., Andrew, A.S., Bertazzi, P.A., Pesatori, A.C., Diao, N., Su, L., Song, L., Zhang, R., Leighl, N., Johansen, J.S., Mellemgaard, A., Saliba, W., Haiman, C., Wilkens, L., Fernandez-Somoano, A., Fernandez-Tardon, G., Heijden, E.H.F.M., Kim, J.H., Davies, M.P.A., Marcus, M.W., Brunnström, H., Manjer, J., Melander, O., Muller, D.C., Overvad, K., Trichopoulou, A., Tumino, R., Goodman, G.E., Cox, A., Taylor, F., Woll, P., Wichmann, E., Muley, T., Risch, A., Rosenberger, A., Grankvist, K., Johansson, M., Shepherd, F., Tsao, M.-S., Arnold, S.M., Haura, E.B., Bolca, C., Holcatova, I., Janout, V., Kontic, M., Lissowska, J., Mukeria, A., Ognjanovic, S., Orlowski, T.M., Scelo, G., Swiatkowska, B., Zaridze, D., Bakke, P., Skaug, V., Butler, L.M., Offit, K., Srinivasan, P., Bandlamudi, C., Hellmann, M.D., Solit, D.B., Robson, M.E., Rudin, C.M., Stadler, Z.K., Taylor, B.S., Berger, M.F., Houlston, R., McLaughlin, J., Stevens, V., Nickle, D.C., Obeidat, M., Timens, W., Artigas, M.S., Shete, S., Brenner, H., Chanock, S., Brennan, P., McKay, J.D., Amos, C.I.

Contains fulltext : 229073.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: With the introduction of new therapeutic options, the landscape of metastatic bladder cancer (mBC) management is shifting. We describe current clinical practice and outcomes of mBC patients as a benchmark for translation of developments into clinical practice in the near future. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nation-wide population-based cohort study including all patients diagnosed with synchronous metastatic bladder cancer in the Netherlands in 2016-2017, identified through the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Clinical data on patient and disease characteristics, treatments and survival from the NCR were supplemented with specific information from electronic health records and descriptively analyzed. This study was part of the Prospective Bladder Cancer Infrastructure. RESULTS: Synchronous metastatic bladder cancer was diagnosed in 636 patients in the Netherlands in 2016 and 2017. 35% (221 patients) received systemic treatment, of whom 88 received multiple treatment lines. Most common first-line regimen was carboplatin-based chemotherapy (49%), followed by cisplatin-based chemotherapy (41%) and immunotherapy (8%). Factors associated with systemic treatment were: young age

Objective: Previous studies regarding cigarette smoking causing a lower risk of melanoma are inconclusive. Here, we re-examined melanoma risk in relation to cigarette smoking in a large, case-control study. Methods: In total 1,157 patients with melanoma diagnosed between 2003 and 2011 in the Netherlands and 5,595 controls from the Nijmegen Biomedical Study were included. Information concerning smoking habits and known risk factors for melanoma were obtained through self-administered questionnaires. Logistic regression analyses stratified by gender were performed to study the risk of cigarette smoking on melanoma risk, adjusted for age, marital status, highest level of education, skin type, sun vacation, use of solarium, time spent outdoors, and sun protective measures. Results: Among men, current and former smokers did not have a higher risk of melanoma compared to never smokers: adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–0.79) and adjusted OR = 0.50 (95% CI: 0.39–0.64), respectively. With an increasing number of years smoked the risk of melanoma decreased: 40 years: OR = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.15–0.44). No clear trend was found for the number of cigarettes smoked. Results for females were less clear and not statistically significant (current smoker: adjusted OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.74–1.26, former smoker: adjusted OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.73–1.08). Conclusion: This study shows a strong inverse association between cigarette smoking and melanoma risk in men. Fundamental laboratory research is necessary to investigate the biological relation between smoking cigarettes and melanoma.

Contains fulltext : 218301.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients are at high risk for tumour recurrence and progression, hence an intensive follow-up procedure is recommended which is costly. Identification of factors that are associated with the risk of recurrence and progression may enable personalized follow-up schedules. Obesity and diabetes mellitus may be associated with a worse prognosis, but the evidence is limited and inconsistent. Our objective was to determine the associations of BMI and diabetes mellitus with risks of recurrence and progression among non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients. METHODS: A population-based cohort of patients diagnosed with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer between 1995 and 2010 was retrospectively identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and invited to participate in the Nijmegen Bladder Cancer Study (n = 1,433). Average weight during adult life, height, and diabetes mellitus diagnosis were self-reported by use of a questionnaire. Clinical follow-up data were retrieved from medical files. Associations were quantified using proportional hazard analyses. For all analyses, minimal adjustment sets were selected using a Directed Acyclic Graph. RESULTS: Fourteen percent of the patients indicated to be diagnosed with diabetes mellitus, and more than half was overweight (45%) or obese (9%). Compared to healthy weight, overweight and obesity were not associated with risk of recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.22, and HR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.76-1.38, respectively) and overall progression (HR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.74-1.44, and HR = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.69-2.09, respectively). Also, no clear associations of diabetes mellitus with risk of recurrence (HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.98-1.54) and overall progression (HR = 1.16; 95% CI: 0.76-1.76) were found. CONCLUSION: Average BMI during adult life and diabetes mellitus were not clearly associated with risk of recurrence or progression in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Prospective cohort studies with detailed information on BMI and diabetes mellitus before and after diagnosis are needed to confirm these findings.

Background: To provide insight in the treatment variation of very-low-risk prostate cancer patients and to assess the role of hospital-related factors. Methods: All patients diagnosed with very-low-risk prostate cancer (cT1c-cT2a, PSA < 10 ng/ml, Gleason score

Publisher's version (útgefin grein)., Background: Mutations in BRCA2 cause a higher risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer (PrCa). The IMPACT study is evaluating targeted PrCa screening using prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) in men with germline BRCA1/2 mutations. Objective: To report the utility of PSA screening, PrCa incidence, positive predictive value of PSA, biopsy, and tumour characteristics after 3 yr of screening, by BRCA status. Design, setting, and participants: Men aged 40–69 yr with a germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation and male controls testing negative for a familial BRCA1/2 mutation were recruited. Participants underwent PSA screening for 3 yr, and if PSA > 3.0 ng/ml, men were offered prostate biopsy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: PSA levels, PrCa incidence, and tumour characteristics were evaluated. Statistical analyses included Poisson regression offset by person-year follow-up, chi-square tests for proportion t tests for means, and Kruskal-Wallis for medians. Results and limitations: A total of 3027 patients (2932 unique individuals) were recruited (919 BRCA1 carriers, 709 BRCA1 noncarriers, 902 BRCA2 carriers, and 497 BRCA2 noncarriers). After 3 yr of screening, 527 men had PSA > 3.0 ng/ml, 357 biopsies were performed, and 112 PrCa cases were diagnosed (31 BRCA1 carriers, 19 BRCA1 noncarriers, 47 BRCA2 carriers, and 15 BRCA2 noncarriers). Higher compliance with biopsy was observed in BRCA2 carriers compared with noncarriers (73% vs 60%). Cancer incidence rate per 1000 person years was higher in BRCA2 carriers than in noncarriers (19.4 vs 12.0; p = 0.03); BRCA2 carriers were diagnosed at a younger age (61 vs 64 yr; p = 0.04) and were more likely to have clinically significant disease than BRCA2 noncarriers (77% vs 40%; p = 0.01). No differences in age or tumour characteristics were detected between BRCA1 carriers and BRCA1 noncarriers. The 4 kallikrein marker model discriminated better (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.73) for clinically significant cancer at biopsy than PSA alone (AUC = 0.65). Conclusions: After 3 yr of screening, compared with noncarriers, BRCA2 mutation carriers were associated with a higher incidence of PrCa, younger age of diagnosis, and clinically significant tumours. Therefore, systematic PSA screening is indicated for men with a BRCA2 mutation. Further follow-up is required to assess the role of screening in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Patient summary: We demonstrate that after 3 yr of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, we detect more serious prostate cancers in men with BRCA2 mutations than in those without these mutations. We recommend that male BRCA2 carriers are offered systematic PSA screening. © 2019 The Authors We demonstrate that after 3 yr of prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing, we detect more serious prostate cancers in men with BRCA2 mutations than those without these mutations. We recommend that male BRCA2 carriers are offered systematic PSA screening., We demonstrate that, after four annual PSA screening rounds, BRCA2 mutation carriers have a higher incidence of PrCa, are diagnosed at a younger age, and present with more clinically significant tumours than BRCA2 noncarriers. Further follow-up is required to assess the role of screening in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Therefore, these data support the use of systematic PSA screening in male BRCA2 carriers. Author contributions : Rosalind A. Eeles had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design : Aaronson, Ardern-Jones, Bancroft, Bangma, Castro, Dearnaley, Eccles, Evans, Eyfjord, Falconer, Foster, Gronberg, Hamdy, Johannsson, Khoo, Kote-Jarai, Lilja, Lindeman, Lubinski, Mahle, Mikropoulos, Mitra, Moynihan, Page, Rennert, Suri. Acquisition of data: All authors. Analysis and interpretation of data: All authors. Drafting of the manuscript: All authors. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors. Statistical analysis : Page, Bancroft, Brook, Assel, Vickers, Lilja. Obtaining funding : Eeles and all IMPACT collaborating sites obtained their own funding for running the study at their site. Administrative, technical, or material support: All authors. Supervision: Eeles. Other : None. Financial disclosures: Rosalind A. Eeles certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Hans Lilja holds patents for intact PSA assays, and is named, along with Andrew J. Vickers, on a patent application for a statistical method to detect prostate cancer. The patents have been licensed and commercialised as the 4 Kscore by OPKO Health. Drs. Vickers and Lilja receive royalties from sales of this test. Additionally, Dr. Lilja owns stock and Dr. Vickers owns stock options in OPKO. Professor Rosalind Eeles: Royal Marsden Hospital—Nov 2017; support from Janssen; honorarium as speaker £1100; University of Chicago invited talk May 2018; honorarium as speaker Rosalind A. Eeles certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Hans Lilja holds patents for intact PSA assays, and is named, along with Andrew J. Vickers, on a patent application for a statistical method to detect prostate cancer. The patents have been licensed and commercialised as the 4 Kscore by OPKO Health. Drs. Vickers and Lilja receive royalties from sales of this test. Additionally, Dr. Lilja owns stock and Dr. Vickers owns stock options in OPKO. Professor Rosalind Eeles: Royal Marsden Hospital—Nov 2017; support from Janssen; honorarium as speaker £1100; University of Chicago invited talk May 2018; honorarium as speaker $1000. The remaining authors have no other conflict of interest to declare.000. The remaining authors have no other conflict of interest to declare. Funding/Support and role of the sponsor : This research is coordinated by the Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK, and is supported by grants from Cancer Research UK (grant references C5047/A21332, C5047/A13232, and C5047/A17528) and the Ronald and Rita McAulay Foundation. Judith Offman is supported by Cancer Research UK Programme Grant reference C8161/A16892. Mr. and Mrs. Jack Baker are acknowledged for supporting the study in NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA and Myriad Genetics Laboratory, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, for providing research BRCA testing rates for NorthShore University HealthSystem patients. We acknowledge funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to the Biomedical Research Center at the Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, at Manchester University Foundation Trust (IS-BRC-1215-20007), the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre Program, and the Cambridge Clinical Research Centre, NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre. We acknowledge that in Australia, this project was cofunded by Cancer Council Tasmania and Cancer Australia (grant number 1006349 [2011–2013]), Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (grant number PCFA PRO4 [2008]), Cancer Councils of Victoria and South Australia (grant number 400048 [2006–2008]), the Victorian Cancer Agency Clinical Trial Capacity CTCB08_14, Cancer Australia and Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (2014–2016; grant number 1059423), and Translational grants EOI09_50. The Association of International Cancer Research funded data collection in The Netherlands (AICR 10-0596). We acknowledge funding from the Basser Center for BRCA (to Susan Domchek). This work was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute (NIH/NCI) with a Cancer Center Support Grant to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (P30 CA008748), a SPORE grant in Prostate Cancer to Dr. H. Scher (P50-CA92629), the Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, David H. Koch through the Prostate Cancer Foundation. This work was also supported in part by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre Program in UK, the Swedish Cancer Society (CAN 2017/559), the Swedish Research Council (VR-MH project no. 2016-02974), and General Hospital in Malmö Foundation for Combating Cancer. We acknowledge funding from the Slovenian Research Agency, Research programme P3-0352. We thank CERCA Program/Generalitat de Catalunya for their institutional support. Elena Castro acknowledges funding from Prostate Cancer Foundation. We acknowledge the support of the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (organismo adscrito al Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad), “Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), una manera de hacer Europa” (PI10/01422, PI13/00285, PIE13/00022, PI16/00563, JR18/00011 and CIBERONC), and the Institut Català de la Salut and Autonomous Government of Catalonia (2009SGR290, 2014SGR338 and PERIS Project MedPerCan). We acknowledge funding support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia to the IPO Porto study (project grant PTDC/DTP-PIC/1308/2014 to Manuel R. Teixeira and fellowship grant SFRH/BD/116557/2016 to Marta Cardoso).

Altered DNA repair capacity may affect an individual's susceptibility to cancers due to compromised genomic integrity. This study was designed to elucidate the association of selected polymorphisms in DNA repair genes with urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC). OGG1 rs1052133 and rs2304277, XRCC1 rs1799782 and rs25487, XRCC3 rs861539, XPC rs2228001, and XPD rs13181 were genotyped using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) in 200 UBC cases and 200 controls. We found association of OGG1 rs2304277 [odds ratio (OR)GG = 3.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.79-7.06] and XPC rs2228001 (ORAC = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.43-3.94) with UBC. In stratified analysis with respect to smoking status, OGG1 rs2304277 and XPC rs2228001 exhibited increased risk in smokers [(rs2304277 ORGG = 4.96, 95% CI = 1.51-16.30) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.02-4.72)] as well as nonsmokers [(rs2304277 ORGG = 2.95, 95% CI = 1.26-6.90) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.31-5.04)]. These polymorphisms were also associated with both low-grade [(rs2304277 ORGG = 3.73, 95% CI = 1.72-8.09) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.21-3.92)] and high-grade tumors [(rs2304277 ORGG = 3.45, 95% CI = 1.52-7.80) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.48-5.33)] as well as with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer [(rs2304277 ORGG = 4.03, 95% CI = 1.87-8.67) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.20-3.81)] and muscle-invasive bladder cancer [(rs2304277 ORGG = 3.06, 95%CI = 1.31-7.13) (rs2228001 ORAC = 2.95, 95%CI = 1.51-5.75)]. This is the first study on DNA repair gene polymorphisms and UBC in the Pakistani population. It identifies OGG1 rs2304277 and replicates XPC rs2228001 as significant modulators of UBC susceptibility.

Purpose Based on improvements of progression-free survival (PFS), new agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been approved. It is assumed that one of the benefits is a delay in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) deterioration as a result of a delay in progression of disease. However, little data are available supporting this relationship. This study aims to provide insight into the most important determinants of HRQoL (including progression of disease) of patients with mRCC. Methods A patient registry (PERCEPTION) was created to evaluate treatment of patients with (m)RCC in the Netherlands. HRQoL was measured, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, every 3 months in the first year of participation in the study, and every 6 months in the second year. Participation started as soon as possible following a diagnosis of (m)RCC. Random effects models were used to study associations between HRQoL and patient and disease characteristics, symptoms and treatment. Results Eighty-seven patients with mRCC completed 304 questionnaires. The average EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status was 69 (SD, 19) before progression and 61 (SD, 22) after progression of disease. Similarly, the average EQ-5D utility was 0.75 (SD, 0.19) before progression and 0.66 (SD, 0.30) after progression of disease. The presence of fatigue, pain, dyspnoea, and the application of radiotherapy were associated with significantly lower EQ-5D utilities. Conclusions Key drivers for reduced HRQoL in mRCC are disease symptoms. Since symptoms increase with progression of disease, targeted therapies that increase PFS are expected to postpone reductions in HRQoL in mRCC. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1704-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Contains fulltext : 174142.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) For many years, research on the biology underlying bladder cancer focused on protein-coding genes which cover only about 3% of the human genome. Recently, it was discovered that a large part of the human genome is actively transcribed as long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). LncRNAs are master regulators of gene expression and several lncRNAs were shown to play a role in bladder cancer development and progression. Here, we analyzed lncRNA expression in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) using the MiTranscriptome database of cancer lncRNA expression profiles, and we studied their function in bladder cancer-derived tumor cells. Analysis of the MiTranscriptome lncRNA expression data revealed four MIBC subgroups, which partially overlapped with the four mRNA clusters identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas consortium. Up-regulation of three lncRNAs CAT266, CAT1297, and CAT1647 in bladder cancer, in comparison to normal urothelium, was confirmed in an independent series of normal, non-muscle invasive (NMIBC) and MIBC tissue samples. Furthermore, expression levels of CAT1297 were found to be correlated with disease-free and overall survival in MIBC. Knockdown of CAT266, CAT1297, and CAT1647 decreased cell viability and colony formation, due to the induction of apoptosis. In conclusion, our data show that lncRNAs expression is de-regulated in MIBC and three aberrantly expressed transcripts regulate proliferation and apoptosis. Our data indicate that lncRNAs play an important role in MIBC development and progression and are a treasure chest for the discovery of new biomarkers.

// Dieuwertje E.G. Kok 1 , Lambertus A.L.M. Kiemeney 2, 3 , Gerald W. Verhaegh 3 , Jack A. Schalken 3 , Emile N.J.T. van Lin 4 , J.P. Michiel Sedelaar 3 , J. Alfred Witjes 3 , Christina A. Hulsbergen - van de Kaa 5 , Pieter van ’t Veer 1 , Ellen Kampman 1, 2 , Lydia A. Afman 1 1 Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands 2 Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 3 Department of Urology, Radboud university Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 4 Strahlentherapie Bonn Rhein Sieg, Wesel, Germany 5 Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Correspondence to: Lydia A. Afman, email: lydia.afman@wur.nl Keywords: selenium, prostatic neoplasms, gene expression, microarray, EMT Received: February 06, 2016 Accepted: December 16, 2016 Published: January 06, 2017 ABSTRACT In parallel with the inconsistency in observational studies and chemoprevention trials, the mechanisms by which selenium affects prostate cancer risk have not been elucidated. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to examine the effects of a short-term intervention with selenium on gene expression in non-malignant prostate tissue. Twenty-three men received 300 µg selenium per day in the form of selenized yeast (n=12) or a placebo (n=11) during 5 weeks. Prostate biopsies collected from the transition zone before and after intervention were analysed for 15 participants (n=8 selenium, n=7 placebo). Pathway analyses revealed that the intervention with selenium was associated with down-regulated expression of genes involved in cellular migration, invasion, remodeling and immune responses. Specifically, expression of well-established epithelial markers, such as E-cadherin and epithelial cell adhesion molecule EPCAM, was up-regulated, while the mesenchymal markers vimentin and fibronectin were down-regulated after intervention with selenium. This implies an inhibitory effect of selenium on the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Moreover, selenium was associated with down-regulated expression of genes involved in wound healing and inflammation; processes which are both related to EMT. In conclusion, our explorative data showed that selenium affected expression of genes implicated in EMT in the transition zone of the prostate.

Common sequence variants at the haptoglobin gene (HP) have been associated with blood lipid levels. Through whole-genome sequencing of 8,453 Icelanders, we discovered a splice donor founder mutation in HP (NM_001126102.1:c.190 + 1G > C, minor allele frequency = 0.56%). This mutation occurs on the HP1 allele of the common copy number variant in HP and leads to a loss of function of HP1. It associates with lower levels of haptoglobin (P = 2.1 × 10-54), higher levels of non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (β = 0.26 mmol/l, P = 2.6 × 10-9) and greater risk of coronary artery disease (odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-1.54, P = 0.0024). Through haplotype analysis and with RNA sequencing, we provide evidence of a causal relationship between one of the two haptoglobin isoforms, namely Hp1, and lower levels of non-HDL cholesterol. Furthermore, we show that the HP1 allele associates with various other quantitative biological traits.

BACKGROUND: Although urinary adverse events after treatment of prostate cancer (CaP) are common, population-based studies on functional outcomes are scarce. The aim of this study is to evaluate the occurrence of urinary incontinence (UI) and erectile dysfunction (ED) in daily clinical practice using a nationwide Dutch cohort of patients with localized or locally advanced CaP.BASIC PROCEDURES: Patients were invited to complete the EPIC-26 questionnaire before treatment (baseline) and at 12 and 24 months after diagnosis. We calculated the mean EPIC-26 domain scores, stratified by treatment modality (i.e., radical prostatectomy, external radiotherapy, and no active treatment), and the proportions of patients with UI (defined as ≥ 2 pads per day) and ED (defined as erections not firm enough for sexual intercourse). Logistic regression modeling was used to explore the factors related to UI and ED after surgery.MAIN FINDINGS: In total 1,759 patients participated in this study. Patients undergoing radical prostatectomy experienced clinically relevant worsening in the urinary incontinence domain. After excluding patients who reported UI at baseline, 15% of patients with prostatectomy reported UI 24 months after diagnosis. Only comorbidity was associated with UI in surgically treated patients. Regardless of treatment, patients reported a clinically significant reduced sexual functioning over time. Before treatment, 54% of patients reported ED. Among the 46% remaining patients, 87% of patients treated with radical prostatectomy reported ED 24 months after diagnosis, 41% after radiotherapy, and 46% in patients without active treatment. Bilateral nerve-sparing surgery was the only factor associated with ED after 24 months.PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: UI and ED frequently occur in patients with localized and locally advanced CaP, in particular after radical prostatectomy. The higher occurrence rate of UI and ED, compared with clinical trial participants, supports the importance of real-world data, which can be used for local treatment recommendations and patient information, but also to evaluate effects of future initiatives, such as treatment centralization and research aimed at improving functional outcomes.

Background: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) causes a considerable health burden due to the high recurrence and progression rates. Past studies have identified multiple candidate loci associated with NMIBC prognosis, albeit lacking validation. Moreover, scarce reports exist on genetic susceptibility to independent prognostic predictors of NMIBC, such as stage or grade.Objective: To investigate genetic associations with NMIBC tumour and patient characteristics at the time of diagnosis.Design, setting, and participants: A sample of 653 NMIBC cases comes from the Bladder Cancer Prognosis Programme. Replication of the significant findings was conducted in the Nijmegen Bladder Cancer Study cohort (N = 1470).Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: A genome-wide association study (GWAS) was carried out for outcomes of tumour size (as a continuous variable in centimetres), stage (Tis and T1 vs Ta), grade (G3 vs G2 and G1), and age (as continuous [years] and dichotomous [70.2 yr as a cut-off] variables).Results and limitations: Significant (p Conclusions: Our study suggests that rs180940944 (NBEA) is associated with an increased NMIBC tumour size at the time of diagnosis. Given study limitations, further eplication is essential to validate the finding.Patient summary: The current study reports on a genome-wide association study on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer tumour and patient characteristics. We suggest that NBEA gene might be associated with increased tumour size at the time of diagnosis. The result must be replicated to establish validity.

We aimed to detect Attention-deficit/hyperactivity (ADHD) risk-conferring genes in adults. In children, ADHD is characterized by age-inappropriate levels of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity and may persists into adulthood. Childhood and adulthood ADHD are heritable, and are thought to represent the clinical extreme of a continuous distribution of ADHD symptoms in the general population. We aimed to leverage the power of studies of quantitative ADHD symptoms in adults who were genotyped. Within the SAGA (Study of ADHD trait genetics in adults) consortium, we estimated the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based heritability of quantitative self-reported ADHD symptoms and carried out a genome-wide association meta-analysis in nine adult population-based and case-only cohorts of adults. A total of n = 14,689 individuals were included. In two of the SAGA cohorts we found a significant SNP-based heritability for self-rated ADHD symptom scores of respectively 15% (n = 3656) and 30% (n = 1841). The top hit of the genome-wide meta-analysis (SNP rs12661753; p-value = 3.02 × 10 −7 ) was present in the long non-coding RNA gene STXBP5-AS1. This association was also observed in a meta-analysis of childhood ADHD symptom scores in eight population-based pediatric cohorts from the Early Genetics and Lifecourse Epidemiology (EAGLE) ADHD consortium (n = 14,776). Genome-wide meta-analysis of the SAGA and EAGLE data (n = 29,465) increased the strength of the association with the SNP rs12661753. In human HEK293 cells, expression of STXBP5-AS1 enhanced the expression of a reporter construct of STXBP5, a gene known to be involved in “SNAP” (Soluble NSF attachment protein) Receptor” (SNARE) complex formation. In mouse strains featuring different levels of impulsivity, transcript levels in the prefrontal cortex of the mouse ortholog Gm28905 strongly correlated negatively with motor impulsivity as measured in the five choice serial reaction time task (r 2 = − 0.61; p = 0.004). Our results are consistent with an effect of the STXBP5-AS1 gene on ADHD symptom scores distribution and point to a possible biological mechanism, other than antisense RNA inhibition, involved in ADHD-related impulsivity levels.

Publisher's version (útgefin grein)., Quantifying the genetic correlation between cancers can provide important insights into the mechanisms driving cancer etiology. Using genome-wide association study summary statistics across six cancer types based on a total of 296,215 cases and 301,319 controls of European ancestry, here we estimate the pair-wise genetic correlations between breast, colorectal, head/neck, lung, ovary and prostate cancer, and between cancers and 38 other diseases. We observed statistically significant genetic correlations between lung and head/neck cancer (rg = 0.57, p = 4.6 × 10−8), breast and ovarian cancer (rg = 0.24, p = 7 × 10−5), breast and lung cancer (rg = 0.18, p =1.5 × 10−6) and breast and colorectal cancer (rg = 0.15, p = 1.1 × 10−4). We also found that multiple cancers are genetically correlated with non-cancer traits including smoking, psychiatric diseases and metabolic characteristics. Functional enrichment analysis revealed a significant excess contribution of conserved and regulatory regions to cancer heritability. Our comprehensive analysis of cross-cancer heritability suggests that solid tumors arising across tissues share in part a common germline genetic basis., The authors in this manuscript were working on behalf of BCAC, CCFR, CIMBA, CORECT, GECCO, OCAC, PRACTICAL, CRUK, BPC3, CAPS, PEGASUS, TRICL-ILCCO, ABCTB, APCB, BCFR, CONSIT TEAM, EMBRACE, GC-HBOC, GEMO, HEBON, kConFab/AOCS Mod SQuaD, and SWE-BRCA. The breast cancer genome-wide association analyses: BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK [C1287/A16563, C1287/A10118], the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant numbers 634935 and 633784 for BRIDGES and B-CAST, respectively), and by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement number 223175 (grant number HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS). The EU Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme funding source had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. Genotyping of the OncoArray was funded by the NIH Grant U19 CA148065, and Cancer UK Grant C1287/A16563 and the PERSPECTIVE project supported by the Government of Canada through Genome Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant GPH-129344) and, the Ministère de l’Économie, Science et Innovation du Québec through Genome Québec and the PSR-SIIRI-701 grant, and the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation. Funding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from: the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978), and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065, and 1U19 CA148112—the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, and Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The DRIVE Consortium was funded by U19 CA148065. The Australian Breast Cancer Family Study (ABCFS) was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR. The ABCFS was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia), and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. J.L.H. is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Principal Research Fellow. M.C.S. is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. The ABCS study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society [grants NKI 2007-3839; 2009 4363]. The Australian Breast Cancer Tissue Bank (ABCTB) is generously supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, The Cancer Institute NSW and the National Breast Cancer Foundation. The ACP study is funded by the Breast Cancer Research Trust, UK. The AHS study is supported by the intramural research program of the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institute (grant number Z01-CP010119), and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (grant number Z01-ES049030). The work of the BBCC was partly funded by ELAN-Fond of the University Hospital of Erlangen. The BBCS is funded by Cancer Research UK and Breast Cancer Now and acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, and the National Cancer Research Network (NCRN). The BCEES was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia and the Cancer Council Western Australia and acknowledges funding from the National Breast Cancer Foundation (JS). For the BCFR-NY, BCFR-PA, and BCFR-UT this work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government or the BCFR. For BIGGS, ES is supported by NIHR Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, Guy’s & St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London, United Kingdom. IT is supported by the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. BOCS is supported by funds from Cancer Research UK (C8620/A8372/A15106) and the Institute of Cancer Research (UK). BOCS acknowledges NHS funding to the Royal Marsden/Institute of Cancer Research NIHR Specialist Cancer Biomedical Research Centre. The BREast Oncology GAlician Network (BREOGAN) is funded by Acción Estratégica de Salud del Instituto de Salud Carlos III FIS PI12/02125/Cofinanciado FEDER; Acción Estratégica de Salud del Instituto de Salud Carlos III FIS Intrasalud (PI13/01136); Programa Grupos Emergentes, Cancer Genetics Unit, Instituto de Investigacion Biomedica Galicia Sur. Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain; Grant 10CSA012E, Consellería de Industria Programa Sectorial de Investigación Aplicada, PEME I + D e I + D Suma del Plan Gallego de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica de la Consellería de Industria de la Xunta de Galicia, Spain; Grant EC11-192. Fomento de la Investigación Clínica Independiente, Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad, Spain; and Grant FEDER-Innterconecta. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad, Xunta de Galicia, Spain. The BSUCH study was supported by the Dietmar-Hopp Foundation, the Helmholtz Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). The CAMA study was funded by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACyT) (SALUD-2002-C01-7462). Sample collection and processing was funded in part by grants from the National Cancer Institute (NCI R01CA120120 and K24CA169004). CBCS is funded by the Canadian Cancer Society (grant # 313404) and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CCGP is supported by funding from the University of Crete. The CECILE study was supported by Fondation de France, Institut National du Cancer (INCa), Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire, de l’Alimentation, de l’Environnement et du Travail (ANSES), Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR). The CGPS was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council, and Herlev and Gentofte Hospital. The CNIO-BCS was supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, the Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cáncer and grants from the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer and the Fondo de Investigación Sanitario (PI11/00923 and PI12/00070). COLBCCC is supported by the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. D.T. was in part supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. The American Cancer Society funds the creation, maintenance, and updating of the CPS-II cohort. The CTS was initially supported by the California Breast Cancer Act of 1993 and the California Breast Cancer Research Fund (contract 97-10500) and is currently funded through the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA77398, UM1 CA164917, and U01 CA199277). Collection of cancer incidence data was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885. H.A.C eceives support from the Lon V Smith Foundation (LVS39420). The University of Westminster curates the DietCompLyf database funded by Against Breast Cancer Registered Charity No. 1121258 and the NCRN. The coordination of EPIC is financially supported by the European Commission (DG-SANCO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The national cohorts are supported by: Ligue Contre le Cancer, Institut Gustave Roussy, Mutuelle Générale de l’Education Nationale, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) (France); German Cancer Aid, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (Germany); the Hellenic Health Foundation, the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (Greece); Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro-AIRC-Italy and National Research Council (Italy); Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS), Netherlands Cancer Registry (NKR), LK Research Funds, Dutch Prevention Funds, Dutch ZON (Zorg Onderzoek Nederland), World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), Statistics Netherlands (The Netherlands); Health Research Fund (FIS), PI13/00061 to Granada, PI13/01162 to EPIC-Murcia, Regional Governments of Andalucía, Asturias, Basque Country, Murcia and Navarra, ISCIII RETIC (RD06/0020) (Spain); Cancer Research UK (14136 to EPIC-Norfolk; C570/A16491 and C8221/A19170 to EPIC-Oxford), Medical Research Council (1000143 to EPIC-Norfolk, MR/M012190/1 to EPIC-Oxford) (United Kingdom). The ESTHER study was supported by a grant from the Baden Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts. Additional cases were recruited in the context of the VERDI study, which was supported by a grant from the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe). FHRISK is funded from NIHR grant PGfAR 0707-10031. The GC-HBOC (German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer) is supported by the German Cancer Aid (grant no 110837, coordinator: Rita K. Schmutzler, Cologne). This work was also funded by the European Regional Development Fund and Free State of Saxony, Germany (LIFE - Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases, project numbers 713-241202, 713-241202, 14505/2470, and 14575/2470). The GENICA was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany grants 01KW9975/5, 01KW9976/8, 01KW9977/0, and 01KW0114, the Robert Bosch Foundation, Stuttgart, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, the Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), Bochum, as well as the Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Johanniter Krankenhaus, Bonn, Germany. The GEPARSIXTO study was conducted by the German Breast Group GmbH. The GESBC was supported by the Deutsche Krebshilfe e. V. [70492] and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). GLACIER was supported by Breast Cancer Now, CRUK and Biomedical Research Centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London. The HABCS study was supported by the Claudia von Schilling Foundation for Breast Cancer Research, by the Lower Saxonian Cancer Society, and by the Rudolf-Bartling Foundation. The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (266528), the Finnish Cancer Society, and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. The HERPACC was supported by MEXT Kakenhi (No. 170150181 and 26253041) from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, Culture and Technology of Japan, by a Grant-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive 10-Year Strategy for Cancer Control from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, by Health and Labour Sciences Research Grants for Research on Applying Health Technology from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, by National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund, and “Practical Research for Innovative Cancer Control (15ck0106177h0001)” from Japan Agency for Medical Research and development, AMED, and Cancer Bio Bank Aichi. The HMBCS was supported by a grant from the Friends of Hannover Medical School and by the Rudolf Bartling Foundation. The HUBCS was supported by a grant from the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education (RUS08/017), and by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations for support the Bioresource collections and RFBR grants 14-04-97088, 17-29-06014, and 17-44-020498. ICICLE was supported by Breast Cancer Now, CRUK, and Biomedical Research Centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London. Financial support for KARBAC was provided through the regional agreement on medical training and clinical research (A.L.F.) between Stockholm County Council and Karolinska Institutet, the Swedish Cancer Society, The Gustav V Jubilee foundation and Bert von Kantzows foundation. The KARMA study was supported by Märit and Hans Rausings Initiative Against Breast Cancer. The KBCP was financially supported by the special Government Funding (E.V.O.) of Kuopio University Hospital grants, Cancer Fund of North Savo, the Finnish Cancer Organizations, and by the strategic funding of the University of Eastern Finland. kConFab is supported by a grant from the National Breast Cancer Foundation, and previously by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. Financial support for the AOCS was provided by the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command [DAMD17-01-1-0729], Cancer Council Victoria, Queensland Cancer Fund, Cancer Council New South Wales, Cancer Council South Australia, The Cancer Foundation of Western Australia, Cancer Council Tasmania and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC; 400413, 400281, 199600). G.C.-T. and P.W. are supported by the NHMRC. RB was a Cancer Institute NSW Clinical Research Fellow. The KOHBRA study was partially supported by a grant from the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), and the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI16C1127; 1020350; 1420190). LAABC is supported by grants (1RB-0287, 3PB-0102, 5PB-0018, 10PB-0098) from the California Breast Cancer Research Program. Incident breast cancer cases were collected by the USC Cancer Surveillance Program (CSP) which is supported under subcontract by the California Department of Health. The CSP is also part of the National Cancer Institute’s Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, under contract number N01CN25403. L.M.B.C. is supported by the ‘Stichting tegen Kanker’. D.L. is supported by the FWO. The MABCS study is funded by the Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology “Georgi D. Efremov” and supported by the German Academic Exchange Program, DAAD. The MARIE study was supported by the Deutsche Krebshilfe e.V. [70-2892-BR I, 106332, 108253, 108419, 110826, 110828], the Hamburg Cancer Society, the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany [01KH0402]. MBCSG is supported by grants from the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) and by funds from the Italian citizens who allocated the 5/1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects “5 × 1000”). The MCBCS was supported by the NIH grants CA192393, CA116167, CA176785 an NIH Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer [CA116201], and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation. MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 209057 and 396414, and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. Cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), including the National Death Index and the Australian Cancer Database. The MEC was support by NIH grants CA63464, CA54281, CA098758, CA132839, and CA164973. The MISS study is supported by funding from ERC-2011-294576 Advanced grant, Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Research Council, Local hospital funds, Berta Kamprad Foundation, Gunnar Nilsson. The MMHS study was supported by NIH grants CA97396, CA128931, CA116201, CA140286, and CA177150. MSKCC is supported by grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative. The work of MTLGEBCS was supported by the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program – grant # CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade – grant # PSR-SIIRI-701. MYBRCA is funded by research grants from the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Malaysia. MYMAMMO is supported by research grants from Yayasan Sime Darby LPGA Tournament and Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (RP046B-15HTM). The NBCS has been supported by the Research Council of Norway grant 193387/V50 (to A.-L. Børresen-Dale and V.N. Kristensen) and grant 193387/H10 (to A.-L. Børresen-Dale and V.N. Kristensen), South Eastern Norway Health Authority (grant 39346 to A.-L. Børresen-Dale and 27208 to V.N. Kristensen) and the Norwegian Cancer Society (to A.-L. Børresen-Dale and 419616 - 71248 - PR-2006-0282 to V.N. Kristensen). It has received funding from the K.G. Jebsen Centre for Breast Cancer Research (2012-2015). The NBHS was supported by NIH grant R01CA100374. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry (NC-BCFR) and Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry (OFBCR) were supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR. The Carolina Breast Cancer Study was funded by Komen Foundation, the National Cancer Institute (P50 CA058223, U54 CA156733, and U01 CA179715), and the North Carolina University Cancer Research Fund. The NGOBCS was supported by Grants-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive Ten-Year Strategy for Cancer Control from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan, and for Scientific Research on Priority Areas, 17015049 and for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas, 221S0001, from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan. The NHS was supported by NIH grants P01 CA87969, UM1 CA186107, and U19 CA148065. The NHS2 was supported by NIH grants UM1 CA176726 and U19 CA148065. The OBCS was supported by research grants from the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Academy of Finland (grant number 250083, 122715 and Center of Excellence grant number 251314), the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, the University of Oulu, the University of Oulu Support Foundation, and the special Governmental EVO funds for Oulu University Hospital-based research activities. The ORIGO study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (RUL 1997-1505) and the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-NL CP16). The PBCS was funded by Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. Genotyping for PLCO was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, NCI, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics. The PLCO is supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics and supported by contracts from the Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health. The POSH study is funded by Cancer Research UK (grants C1275/A11699, C1275/C22524, C1275/A19187, C1275/A15956, and Breast Cancer Campaign 2010PR62, 2013PR044. PROCAS is funded from NIHR grant PGfAR 0707-10031. The RBCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society (DDHK 2004-3124, DDHK 2009-4318). The SASBAC study was supported by funding from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A*STAR), the US National Institute of Health (NIH) and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. The SBCGS was supported primarily by NIH grants R01CA64277, R01CA148667, UMCA182910, and R37CA70867. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The scientific development and funding of this project were, in part, supported by the Genetic Associations and Mechanisms in Oncology (GAME-ON) Network U19 CA148065. The SBCS was supported by Sheffield Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre and Breast Cancer Now Tissue Bank. The SCCS is supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA092447). Data on SCCS cancer cases used in this publication were provided by the Alabama Statewide Cancer Registry; Kentucky Cancer Registry, Lexington, KY; Tennessee Department of Health, Office of Cancer Surveillance; Florida Cancer Data System; North Carolina Central Cancer Registry, North Carolina Division of Public Health; Georgia Comprehensive Cancer Registry; Louisiana Tumor Registry; Mississippi Cancer Registry; South Carolina Central Cancer Registry; Virginia Department of Health, Virginia Cancer Registry; Arkansas Department of Health, Cancer Registry, 4815 W. Markham, Little Rock, AR 72205. The Arkansas Central Cancer Registry is fully funded by a grant from National Program of Cancer Registries, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Data on SCCS cancer cases from Mississippi were collected by the Mississippi Cancer Registry which participates in the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the CDC or the Mississippi Cancer Registry. SEARCH is funded by Cancer Research UK [C490/A10124, C490/A16561] and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge. The University of Cambridge has received salary support for PDPP from the NHS in the East of England through the Clinical Academic Reserve. SEBCS was supported by the BRL (Basic Research Laboratory) program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2012-0000347). SGBCC is funded by the NUS start-up Grant, National University Cancer Institute Singapore (NCIS) Centre Grant and the NMRC Clinician Scientist Award. Additional controls were recruited by the Singapore Consortium of Cohort Studies-Multi-ethnic cohort (SCCS-MEC), which was funded by the Biomedical Research Council, grant number: 05/1/21/19/425. The Sister Study (SISTER) is supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (Z01-ES044005 and Z01-ES049033). The Two Sister Study (2SISTER) was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (Z01-ES044005 and Z01-ES102245), and, also by a grant from Susan G. Komen for the Cure, grant FAS0703856. SKKDKFZS is supported by the DKFZ. The SMC is funded by the Swedish Cancer Foundation. The SZBCS was supported by Grant PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. The TBCS was funded by The National Cancer Institute, Thailand. The TNBCC was supported by a Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a grant from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation. The TWBCS is supported by the Taiwan Biobank project of the Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taiwan. The UCIBCS component of this research was supported by the NIH [CA58860, CA92044] and the Lon V Smith Foundation [LVS39420]. The UKBGS is funded by Breast Cancer Now and the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR), London. ICR acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. The UKOPS study was funded by The Eve Appeal (The Oak Foundation) and supported by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. The US3SS study was supported by Massachusetts (K.M.E., R01CA47305), Wisconsin (P.A.N., R01 CA47147) and New Hampshire (L.T.-E., R01CA69664) centers, and Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. The USRT Study was funded by Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. The WAABCS study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA89085 and P50 CA125183 and the D43 TW009112 grant), Susan G. Komen (SAC110026), the Dr. Ralph and Marian Falk Medical Research Trust, and the Avon Foundation for Women. The WHI program is funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the US National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHSN268201100046C, HHSN268201100001C, HHSN268201100002C, HHSN268201100003C, HHSN268201100004C, and HHSN271201100004C). This work was also funded by NCI U19 CA148065-01. D.G.E. is supported by the all Manchester NIHR Biomedical research center Manchester (IS-BRC-1215-20007). HUNBOCS, Hungarian Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study was supported by Hungarian Research Grant KTIA-OTKA CK-80745, NKFI_OTKA K-112228. C.I. received support from the Nontherapeutic Subject Registry Shared Resource at Georgetown University (NIH/NCI P30-CA-51008) and the Jess and Mildred Fisher Center for Hereditary Cancer and Clinical Genomics Research. K.M. is supported by CRUK C18281/A19169. City of Hope Clinical Cancer Community Research Network and the Hereditary Cancer Research Registry, supported in part by Award Number RC4CA153828 (PI: J Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the office of the Directory, National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The colorectal cancer genome-wide association analyses: Colorectal Transdisciplinary Study (CORECT): The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the CORECT Consortium, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government or the CORECT Consortium. We are incredibly grateful for the contributions of Dr. Brian Henderson and Dr. Roger Green over the course of this study and acknowledge them in memoriam. We are also grateful for support from Daniel and Maryann Fong. ColoCare: we thank the many investigators and staff who made this research possible in ColoCare Seattle and ColoCare Heidelberg. ColoCare was initiated and developed at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center by Drs. Ulrich and Grady. CCFR: the Colon CFR graciously thanks the generous contributions of their study participants, dedication of study staff, and financial support from the U.S. National Cancer Institute, without which this important registry would not exist. Galeon: GALEON wishes to thank the Department of Surgery of University Hospital of Santiago (CHUS), Sara Miranda Ponte, Carmen M Redondo, and the staff of the Department of Pathology and Biobank of CHUS, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago (IDIS), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), SERGAS, Vigo, Spain, and Programa Grupos Emergentes, Cancer Genetics Unit, CHUVI Vigo Hospital, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain. MCCS: this study was made possible by the contribution of many people, including the original investigators and the diligent team who recruited participants and continue to work on follow-up. We would also like to express our gratitude to the many thousands of Melbourne residents who took part in the study and provided blood samples. SEARCH: We acknowledge the contributions of Mitul Shah, Val Rhenius, Sue Irvine, Craig Luccarini, Patricia Harrington, Don Conroy, Rebecca Mayes, and Caroline Baynes. The Swedish low-risk colorectal cancer study: we thank Berith Wejderot and the Swedish low-risk colorectal cancer study group. Genetics & Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO): we thank all those at the GECCO Coordinating Center for helping bring together the data and people that made this project possible. ASTERISK: we are very grateful to Dr. Bruno Buecher without whom this project would not have existed. We also thank all those who agreed to participate in this study, including the patients and the healthy control persons, as well as all the physicians, technicians and students. DACHS: we thank all participants and cooperating clinicians, and Ute Handte-Daub, Renate Hettler-Jensen, Utz Benscheid, Muhabbet Celik, and Ursula Eilber for excellent technical assistance. HPFS, NHS and PHS: we acknowledge Patrice Soule and Hardeep Ranu of the Dana-Farber Harvard Cancer Center High-Throughput Polymorphism Core who assisted in the genotyping for NHS, HPFS, and PHS under the supervision of Dr. Immaculata Devivo and Dr. David Hunter, Qin (Carolyn) Guo, and Lixue Zhu who assisted in programming for NHS and HPFS and Haiyan Zhang who assisted in programming for the PHS. We thank the participants and staff of the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, for their valuable contributions as well as the following state cancer registries for their help: A.L., A.Z., A.R., C.A., C.O., C.T., D.E., F.L., G.A., I.D., I.L., I.N., I.A., K.Y., L.A., M.E., M.D., M.A., M.I., N.E., N.H., N.J., N.Y., N.C., N.D., O.H., O.K., O.R., P.A., R.I., S.C., T.N., T.X., V.A., W.A., W.Y. In addition, this study was approved by the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) Human Investigations Committee. Certain data used in this publication were obtained from the DPH. We assume full responsibility for analyses and interpretation of these data. PLCO: we thank Drs. Christine Berg and Philip Prorok, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, the Screening Center investigators and staff or the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial, Mr. Tom Riley and staff, Information Management Services Inc., Ms. Barbara O’Brien and staff, Westat Inc. and Drs. Bill Kopp, Wen Shao and staff, SAIC-Frederick. Most importantly, we acknowledge the study participants for their contributions for making this study possible. The statements contained herein are solely those of the authors and do not represent or imply concurrence or endorsement by NCI. PMH: we thank the study participants and staff of the Hormones and Colon Cancer study. WHI: we thank the WHI investigators and staff for their dedication, and the study participants for making the program possible. A full listing of WHI investigators can be found at https://cleo.whi.org/researchers/Documents%20%20Write%20a%20Paper/WHI%20Investigator%20Short20List.pdf. CORECT: The CORECT Study was supported by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NCI/NIH), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (grant numbers U19 CA148107, R01 CA81488, P30 CA014089, R01 CA197350; P01 CA196569; and R01 CA201407) and National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (grant number T32 ES013678). The ATBC Study was supported by the US Public Health Service contracts (N01-CN-45165, N01-RC-45035, N01-RC-37004, and HHSN261201000006C) from the National Cancer Institute. The Cancer Prevention Study-II Nutrition Cohort is funded by the American Cancer Society. ColoCare: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers R01 CA189184, U01 CA206110, 2P30CA015704-40 (Gilliland)), the Matthias Lackas-Foundation, the German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research, and the EU TRANSCAN initiative. Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO): funding for GECCO was provided by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (grant numbers U01 CA137088, R01 CA059045, and U01 CA164930). This research was funded in part through the NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA015704. The Colon Cancer Family Registry (CFR) Illumina GWAS was supported by funding from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (grant numbers U01 CA122839, R01 CA143247). The Colon CFR/CORECT Affymetrix Axiom GWAS and OncoArray GWAS were supported by funding from National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (grant number U19 CA148107 to S.G.). The Colon CFR participant recruitment and collection of data and biospecimens used in this study were supported by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (grant number UM1 CA167551) and through cooperative agreements with the following Colon CFR centers: Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (NCI/NIH grant numbers U01 CA074778 and U01/U24 CA097735), USC Consortium Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (NCI/NIH grant numbers U01/U24 CA074799), Mayo Clinic Cooperative Family Registry for Colon Cancer Studies (NCI/NIH grant number U01/U24 CA074800), Ontario Familial Colorectal Cancer Registry (NCI/NIH grant number U01/U24 CA074783), Seattle Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (NCI/NIH grant number U01/U24 CA074794), and University of Hawaii Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (NCI/NIH grant number U01/U24 CA074806), Additional support for case ascertainment was provided from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute to Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (Control Nos. N01-CN-67009 and N01-PC-35142, and Contract No. HHSN2612013000121), the Hawai’i Department of Health (Control Nos. N01-PC-67001 and N01-PC-35137, and Contract No. HHSN26120100037C, and the California Department of Public Health (contracts HHSN261201000035C awarded to the University of Southern California, and the following state cancer registries: A.Z., C.O., M.N., N.C., N.H., and by the Victoria Cancer Registry and Ontario Cancer Registry. ESTHER/VERDI was supported by grants from the Baden–Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts and the German Cancer Aid. MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. GALEON: FIS Intrasalud (PI13/01136). The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 509348, 209057, 251553, and 504711 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. Cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), including the National Death Index and the Australian Cancer Database. MSKCC: the work at Sloan Kettering in New York was supported by the Robert and Kate Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics and the Romeo Milio Foundation. Moffitt: This work was supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers R01 CA189184, P30 CA076292), Florida Department of Health Bankhead-Coley Grant 09BN-13, and the University of South Florida Oehler Foundation. Moffitt contributions were supported in part by the Total Cancer Care Initiative, Collaborative Data Services Core, and Tissue Core at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (grant number P30 CA076292). SEARCH: Cancer Research UK (C490/A16561). The Spanish study was supported by Instituto de Salud Carlos III, co-funded by FEDER funds –a way to build Europe– (grants PI14-613 and PI09-1286), Catalan Government DURSI (grant 2014SGR647), and Junta de Castilla y León (grant LE22A10-2). The Swedish Low-risk Colorectal Cancer Study: the study was supported by grants from the Swedish research council; K2015-55 × -22674-01-4, K2008-55 × -20157-03-3, K2006-72 × -20157-01-2 and the Stockholm County Council (ALF project). CIDR genotyping for the Oncoarray was conducted under contract 268201200008I (to K.D.), through grant 101HG007491-01 (to C.I.A.). The Norris Cotton Cancer Center - P30CA023108, The Quantitative Biology Research Institute - P20GM103534, and the Coordinating Center for Screen Detected Lesions - U01CA196386 also supported efforts of C.I.A. This work was also supported by the National Cancer Institute (grant numbers U01 CA1817700, R01 CA144040). ASTERISK: a Hospital Clinical Research Program (PHRC) and supported by the Regional Council of Pays de la Loire, the Groupement des Entreprises Françaises dans la Lutte contre le Cancer (GEFLUC), the Association Anne de Bretagne Génétique and the Ligue Régionale Contre le Cancer (LRCC). COLO2&3: National Institutes of Health (grant number R01 CA060987). DACHS: This work was supported by the German Research Council (BR 1704/6-1, BR 1704/6-3, BR 1704/6-4, CH 117/1-1, HO 5117/2-1, HE 5998/2-1, KL 2354/3-1, RO 2270/8-1, and BR 1704/17-1), the Interdisciplinary Research Program of the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Germany, and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01KH0404, 01ER0814, 01ER0815, 01ER1505A, and 01ER1505B). DALS: National Institutes of Health (grant number R01 CA048998 to M.L.S). HPFS is supported by National Institutes of Health (grant numbers P01 CA055075, UM1 CA167552, R01 137178, and P50 CA127003), NHS by the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers UM1 CA186107, R01 CA137178, P01 CA087969, and P50 CA127003), NHSII by the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers R01 050385CA and UM1 CA176726), and PHS by the National Institutes of Health (grant number R01 CA042182). MEC: National Institutes of Health (grant numbers R37 CA054281, P01 CA033619, and R01 CA063464). OFCCR: National Institutes of Health, through funding allocated to the Ontario Registry for Studies of Familial Colorectal Cancer (grant number U01 CA074783); see Colon CFR section above. As subset of ARCTIC, OFCCR is supported by a GL2 grant from the Ontario Research Fund, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the Cancer Risk Evaluation (CaRE) Program grant from the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute. T.J.H. and B.W.Z. are recipients of Senior Investigator Awards from the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, through generous support from the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation. PLCO: Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics and supported by contracts from the Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS. Additionally, a subset of control samples was genotyped as part of the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) Prostate Cancer GWAS, Colon CGEMS pancreatic cancer scan (PanScan), and the Lung Cancer and Smoking study. The prostate and PanScan study datasets were accessed with appropriate approval through the dbGaP online resource (http://cgems.cancer.gov/data/) accession numbers phs000207.v1.p1 and phs000206.v3.p2, respectively, and the lung datasets were accessed from the dbGaP website (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gap) through accession number phs000093.v2.p2. Funding for the Lung Cancer and Smoking study was provided by National Institutes of Health (NIH), Genes, Environment and Health Initiative (GEI) Z01 CP 010200, NIH U01 HG004446, and NIH GEI U01 HG 004438. For the lung study, the GENEVA Coordinating Center provided assistance with genotype cleaning and general study coordination, 23 and the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research conducted genotyping. PMH: National Institutes of Health (grant number R01 CA076366). VITAL: National Institutes of Health (grant number K05-CA154337). WHI: The WHI program is funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through contracts HHSN268201600018C, HHSN268201600001C, HHSN268201600002C, HHSN268201600003C, and HHSN268201600004C. The head and neck cancer genome-wide association analyses: The study was supported by NIH/NCI: P50 CA097190, and P30 CA047904, Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (no. 020214) and Cancer Care Ontario Research Chair to R.H. The Princess Margaret Hospital Head and Neck Cancer Translational Research Program is funded by the Wharton family, Joe’s Team, Gordon Tozer, Bruce Galloway and the Elia family. Geoffrey Liu was supported by the Posluns Family Fund and the Lusi Wong Family Fund at the Princess Margaret Foundation, and the Alan B. Brown Chair in Molecular Genomics. This publication presents data from Head and Neck 5000 (H&N5000). H&N5000 was a component of independent research funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (RP-PG-0707-10034). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Human papillomavirus (HPV) in H&N5000 serology was supported by a Cancer Research UK Programme Grant, the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme (grant number: C18281/A19169). National Cancer Institute (R01-CA90731); National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P30ES10126). The authors thank all the members of the GENCAPO team/The Head and Neck Genome Project (GENCAPO) was supported by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) (Grant numbers 04/12054-9 and 10/51168-0). CPS-II recruitment and maintenance is supported with intramural research funding from the American Cancer Society. Genotyping performed at the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) was funded through the U.S. National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) grant 1 × 01HG007780-0. The University of Pittsburgh head and neck cancer case-control study is supported by National Institutes of Health grants P50 CA097190 and P30 CA047904. The Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE) was supported by the National Cancer Institute (R01-CA90731). The Head and Neck Genome Project (GENCAPO) was supported by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) (Grant numbers 04/12054-9 and 10/51168-0). The authors thank all the members of the GENCAPO team. The HN5000 study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (RP-PG-0707-10034), the views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The Toronto study was funded by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (020214) and the National Cancer Institute (U19-CA148127) and the Cancer Care Ontario Research Chair. The alcohol-related cancers and genetic susceptibility study in Europe (ARCAGE) was funded by the European Commission’s 5th Framework Program (QLK1-2001-00182), the Italian Association for Cancer Research, Compagnia di San Paolo/FIRMS, Region Piemonte, and Padova University (CPDA057222). The Rome Study was supported by the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) IG 2011 10491 and IG2013 14220 to S.B., and Fondazione Veronesi to S.B. The IARC Latin American study was funded by the European Commission INCO-DC programme (IC18-CT97-0222), with additional funding from Fondo para la Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (Argentina) and the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (01/01768-2). We thank Leticia Fernandez, Instituto Nacional de Oncologia y Radiobiologia, La Habana, Cuba and Sergio and Rosalina Koifman, for their efforts with the IARC Latin America study São Paulo center. The IARC Central Europe study was supported by European Commission’s INCO-COPERNICUS Program (IC15- CT98-0332), NIH/National Cancer Institute grant CA92039, and the World Cancer Research Foundation grant WCRF 99A28. The IARC Oral Cancer Multicenter study was funded by grant S06 96 202489 05F02 from Europe against Cancer; grants FIS 97/0024, FIS 97/0662, and BAE 01/5013 from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Spain; the UICC Yamagiwa-Yoshida Memorial International Cancer Study; the National Cancer Institute of Canada; Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro; and the Pan-American Health Organization. Coordination of the EPIC study is financially supported by the European Commission (DG-SANCO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The lung cancer genome-wide association analyses: Transdisciplinary Research for Cancer in Lung (TRICL) of the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) was supported by (U19-CA148127, CA148127S1, U19CA203654, and Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas RR170048). The ILCCO data harmonization is supported by Cancer Care Ontario Research Chair of Population Studies to R. H. and Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System. The TRICL-ILCCO OncoArray was supported by in-kind genotyping by the Centre for Inherited Disease Research (26820120008i-0-26800068-1). The CAPUA study was supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03-0365, and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02-67 and FICYT IB09-133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA), of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiologia y Salud Pública. CIBERESP, SPAIN. The work performed in the CARET study was supported by the National Institute of Health/National Cancer Institute: UM1 CA167462 (PI: Goodman), National Institute of Health UO1-CA6367307 (PIs Omen, Goodman); National Institute of Health R01 CA111703 (PI Chen), National Institute of Health 5R01 CA151989-01A1(PI Doherty). The Liverpool Lung project is supported by the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation. The Harvard Lung Cancer Study was supported by the NIH (National Cancer Institute) grants CA092824, CA090578, CA074386. The Multi-ethnic Cohort Study was partially supported by NIH Grants CA164973, CA033619, CA63464, and CA148127. The work performed in MSH-PMH study was supported by The Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (020214), Ontario Institute of Cancer and Cancer Care Ontario Chair Award to R.J.H. and G.L. and the Alan Brown Chair and Lusi Wong Programs at the Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation. NJLCS was funded by the State Key Program of National Natural Science of China (81230067), the National Key Basic Research Program Grant (2011CB503805), the Major Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81390543). The Norway study was supported by Norwegian Cancer Society, Norwegian Research Council. The Shanghai Cohort Study (SCS) was supported by National Institutes of Health R01 CA144034 (PI: Yuan) and UM1 CA182876 (PI: Yuan). The Singapore Chinese Health Study (SCHS) was supported by National Institutes of Health R01 CA144034 (PI: Yuan) and UM1 CA182876 (PI: Yuan). The work in TLC study has been supported in part the James & Esther King Biomedical Research Program (09KN-15), National Institutes of Health Specialized Programs of Research Excellence (SPORE) Grant (P50 CA119997), and by a Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (grant number P30-CA76292). The Vanderbilt Lung Cancer Study—BioVU dataset used for the analyses described was obtained from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s BioVU, which is supported by institutional funding, the 1S10RR025141-01 instrumentation award, and by the Vanderbilt CTSA grant UL1TR000445 from NCATS/NIH. Dr. Aldrich was supported by NIH/National Cancer Institute K07CA172294 (PI: Aldrich) and Dr. Bush was supported by NHGRI/NIH U01HG004798 (PI: Crawford). The Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS) was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev Hospital. The NELCS study: Grant Number P20RR018787 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The Kentucky Lung Cancer Research Initiative was supported by the Department of Defense [Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Program] under award number: 10153006 (W81XWH-11-1-0781). Views and opinions of, and endorsements by the author(s) do not reflect those of the US Army or the Department of Defense. This research was also supported by unrestricted infrastructure funds from the UK Center for Clinical and Translational Science, NIH grant UL1TR000117 and Markey Cancer Center NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA177558) Shared Resource Facilities: Cancer Research Informatics, Biospecimen and Tissue Procurement, and Biostatistics and Bioinformatics. The M.D. Anderson Cancer Center study was supported in part by grants from the NIH (P50 CA070907, R01 CA176568) (to X.W.), Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas (RP130502) (to X.W.), and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center institutional support for the Center for Translational and Public Health Genomics. The deCODE study of smoking and nicotine dependence was funded in part by a grant from NIDA (R01- DA017932). The study in Lodz center was partially funded by Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, under task NIOM 10.13: Predictors of mortality from non-small cell lung cancer—field study. Genetic sharing analysis was funded by NIH grant CA194393. The research undertaken by M.D.T., L.V.W., and M.S.A. was partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. M.D.T. holds a Medical Research Council Senior Clinical Fellowship (G0902313). The work to assemble the FTND GWAS meta-analysis was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) grant number R01 DA035825 (Principal Investigator [PI]: DBH). The study populations included COGEND (dbGaP phs000092.v1.p1 and phs000404.v1.p1), COPDGene (dbGaP phs000179.v3.p2), deCODE Genetics, EAGLE (dbGaP phs000093.vs.p2), and SAGE. dbGaP phs000092.v1.p1). See Hancock et al. Transl Psychiatry 2015 (PMCID: PMC4930126) for the full listing of funding sources and other acknowledgments. The Resource for the Study of Lung Cancer Epidemiology in North Trent (ReSoLuCENT)study was funded by the Sheffield Hospitals Charity, Sheffield Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre and Weston Park Hospital Cancer Charity. The ovarian cancer genome-wide association analysis: The Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) is supported by a grant from the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund thanks to donations by the family and friends of Kathryn Sladek Smith (PPD/RPCI.07). The scientific development and funding for this project were in part supported by the US National Cancer Institute GAME-ON Post-GWAS Initiative (U19-CA148112). This study made use of data generated by the Wellcome Trust Case Control consortium that was funded by the Wellcome Trust under award 076113. The results published here are in part based upon data generated by The Cancer Genome Atlas Pilot Project established by the National Cancer Institute and National Human Genome Research Institute (dbGap accession number phs000178.v8.p7). The OCAC OncoArray genotyping project was funded through grants from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (CA1X01HG007491-01 (C.I.A.), U19-CA148112 (T.A.S.), R01-CA149429 (C.M.P.), and R01-CA058598 (M.T.G.); Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-86727 (L.E.K.) and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (A.B.). The COGS project was funded through a European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme grant (agreement number 223175 - HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) and through a grant from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (R01-CA122443 (E.L.G)). Funding for individual studies: AAS: National Institutes of Health (RO1-CA142081); AOV: The Canadian Institutes for Health Research (MOP-86727); AUS: The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group was supported by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (DAMD17-01-1-0729), National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia (199600, 400413 and 400281), Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania and Cancer Foundation of Western Australia (Multi-State Applications 191, 211, and 182). The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study gratefully acknowledges additional support from Ovarian Cancer Australia and the Peter MacCallum Foundation; BAV: ELAN Funds of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg; BEL: National Kankerplan; BGS: Breast Cancer Now, Institute of Cancer Research; BVU: Vanderbilt CTSA grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) (ULTR000445); CAM: National Institutes of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and Cancer Research UK Cambridge Cancer Centre; CHA: Innovative Research Team in University (PCSIRT) in China (IRT1076); CNI: Instituto de Salud Carlos III (PI12/01319); Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (SAF2012); COE: Department of Defense (W81XWH-11-2-0131); CON: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA063678, R01-CA074850; and R01-CA080742); DKE: Ovarian Cancer Research Fund; DOV: National Institutes of Health R01-CA112523 and R01-CA87538; EMC: Dutch Cancer Society (EMC 2014-6699); EPC: The coordination of EPIC is financially supported by the European Commission (DG-SANCO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The national cohorts are supported by Danish Cancer Society (Denmark); Ligue Contre le Cancer, Institut Gustave Roussy, Mutuelle Générale de l’Education Nationale, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) (France); German Cancer Aid, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (Germany); the Hellenic Health Foundation (Greece); Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro-AIRC-Italy and National Research Council (Italy); Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS), Netherlands Cancer Registry (NKR), LK Research Funds, Dutch Prevention Funds, Dutch ZON (Zorg Onderzoek Nederland), World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), Statistics Netherlands (The Netherlands); ERC-2009-AdG 232997 and Nordforsk, Nordic Centre of Excellence programme on Food, Nutrition and Health (Norway); Health Research Fund (FIS), PI13/00061 to Granada, PI13/01162 to EPIC-Murcia, Regional Governments of Andalucía, Asturias, Basque Country, Murcia and Navarra, ISCIII RETIC (RD06/0020) (Spain); Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Research Council and County Councils of Skåne and Västerbotten (Sweden); Cancer Research UK (14136 to EPIC-Norfolk; C570/A16491 and C8221/A19170 to EPIC-Oxford), Medical Research Council (1000143 to EPIC-Norfolk, MR/M012190/1 to EPIC-Oxford) (United Kingdom); GER: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Programme of Clinical Biomedical Research (01 GB 9401) and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ); GRC: This research has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund—ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program “Education and Lifelong Learning” of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF)—Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research & Technology: SYN11_10_19 NBCA. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund; GRR: Roswell Park Cancer Institute Alliance Foundation, P30 CA016056; HAW: U.S. National Institutes of Health (R01-CA58598, N01-CN-55424, and N01-PC-67001); HJO: Intramural funding; Rudolf-Bartling Foundation; HMO: Intramural funding; Rudolf-Bartling Foundation; HOC: Helsinki University Research Fund; HOP: Department of Defense (DAMD17-02-1-0669) and NCI (K07-CA080668, R01-CA95023, P50-CA159981 MO1-RR000056 R01-CA126841); HUO: Intramural funding; Rudolf-Bartling Foundation; JGO: JSPS KAKENHI grant; JPN: Grant-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive 10-Year Strategy for Cancer Control from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare; KRA: This study (Ko-EVE) was supported by a grant from the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), and the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI16C1127; 0920010); LAX: American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), Grant UL1TR000124; LUN: ERC-2011-AdG 294576-risk factors cancer, Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Research Council, Beta Kamprad Foundation; MAC: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA122443, P30-CA15083, P50-CA136393); Mayo Foundation; Minnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance; Fred C. and Katherine B. Andersen Foundation; Fraternal Order of Eagles; MAL: Funding for this study was provided by research grant R01- CA61107 from the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, research grant 94 222 52 from the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, Denmark; and the Mermaid I project; MAS: Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation; MAY: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA122443, P30-CA15083, and P50-CA136393); Mayo Foundation; Minnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance; Fred C. and Katherine B. Andersen Foundation; MCC: Cancer Council Victoria, National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) grants number 209057, 251533, 396414, and 504715; MDA: DOD Ovarian Cancer Research Program (W81XWH-07-0449); MEC: NIH (CA54281, CA164973, CA63464); MOF: Moffitt Cancer Center, Merck Pharmaceuticals, the state of Florida, Hillsborough County, and the city of Tampa; NCO: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA76016) and the Department of Defense (DAMD17-02-1-0666); NEC: National Institutes of Health R01-CA54419 and P50-CA105009 and Department of Defense W81XWH-10-1-02802; NHS: UM1 CA186107, P01 CA87969, R01 CA49449, R01-CA67262, UM1 CA176726; NJO: National Cancer Institute (NIH-K07 CA095666, R01-CA83918, NIH-K22-CA138563, and P30-CA072720) and the Cancer Institute of New Jersey; If Sara Olson and/or Irene Orlow is a co-author, please add NCI CCSG award (P30-CA008748) to the funding sources; NOR: Helse Vest, The Norwegian Cancer Society, The Research Council of Norway; NTH: Radboud University Medical Centre; OPL: National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia (APP1025142) and Brisbane Women’s Club; ORE: OHSU Foundation; OVA: This work was supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant (MOP-86727) and by NIH/NCI 1 R01CA160669-01A1; PLC: Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute; POC: Pomeranian Medical University; POL: Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute; PVD: Canadian Cancer Society and Cancer Research Society GRePEC Program; RBH: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; RMH: Cancer Research UK, Royal Marsden Hospital; RPC: National Institute of Health (P50-CA159981, R01-CA126841); SEA: Cancer Research UK (C490/A10119 C490/A10124); UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge; SIS: NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Z01-ES044005 and Z01-ES049033; SMC: The bbSwedish Research Council-SIMPLER infrastructure; the Swedish Cancer Foundation; SON: National Health Research and Development Program, Health Canada, grant 6613-1415-53; SRO: Cancer Research UK (C536/A13086, C536/A6689) and Imperial Experimental Cancer Research Centre (C1312/A15589); STA: NIH grants U01 CA71966 and U01 CA69417; SWE: Swedish Cancer foundation, WeCanCureCancer and VårKampMotCancer foundation; SWH: NIH (NCI) grant R37-CA070867; TBO: National Institutes of Health (R01-CA106414-A2), American Cancer Society (CRTG-00-196-01-CCE), Department of Defense (DAMD17-98-1-8659), Celma Mastery Ovarian Cancer Foundation; TOR: NIH grants R01-CA063678 and R01 CA063682; UCI: NIH R01-CA058860 and the Lon V Smith Foundation grant LVS39420; UHN: Princess Margaret Cancer Centre Foundation-Bridge for the Cure; UKO: The UKOPS study was funded by The Eve Appeal (The Oak Foundation) and supported by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre; UKR: Cancer Research UK (C490/A6187), UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge; USC: P01CA17054, P30CA14089, R01CA61132, N01PC67010, R03CA113148, R03CA115195, N01CN025403, and California Cancer Research Program (00-01389V-20170, 2II0200); VAN: BC Cancer Foundation, VGH & UBC Hospital Foundation; VTL: NIH K05-CA154337; WMH: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Enabling Grants ID 310670 & ID 628903. Cancer Institute NSW Grants 12/RIG/1-17 & 15/RIG/1-16; WOC: National Science Centren (N N301 5645 40). The Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland. The University of Cambridge has received salary support for PDPP from the NHS in the East of England through the Clinical Academia Reserve. The prostate cancer genome-wide association analyses: we pay tribute to Brian Henderson, who was a driving force behind the OncoArray project, for his vision and leadership, and who sadly passed away before seeing its fruition. We also thank the individuals who participated in these studies enabling this work. The ELLIPSE/PRACTICAL (http//:practical.icr.ac.uk) prostate cancer consortium and his collaborating partners were supported by multiple funding mechanisms enabling this current work. ELLIPSE/PRACTICAL Genotyping of the OncoArray was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) (U19 CA148537 for ELucidating Loci Involved in Prostate Cancer SuscEptibility (ELLIPSE) project and X01HG007492 to the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) under contract number HHSN268201200008I). Additional analytical support was provided by NIH NCI U01 CA188392 (F.R.S.). Funding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, and C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065, and 1U19 CA148112; the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defense (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK Grants C5047/A7357, C1287/A10118, C1287/A16563, C5047/A3354, C5047/A10692, C16913/A6135, C5047/A21332 and The National Institute of Health (NIH) Cancer Post-Cancer GWAS initiative grant: No. 1 U19 CA148537-01 (the GAME-ON initiative). We also thank the following for funding support: The Institute of Cancer Research and The Everyman Campaign, The Prostate Cancer Research Foundation, Prostate Research Campaign UK (now Prostate Action), The Orchid Cancer Appeal, The National Cancer Research Network UK, and The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) UK. We are grateful for support of NIHR funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. The Prostate Cancer Program of Cancer Council Victoria also acknowledge grant support from The National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (126402, 209057, 251533, 396414, 450104, 504700, 504702, 504715, 623204, 940394, and 614296), VicHealth, Cancer Council Victoria, The Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, The Whitten Foundation, PricewaterhouseCoopers, and Tattersall’s. E.A.O., D.M.K., and E.M.K. acknowledge the Intramural Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute for their support. The BPC3 was supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute (cooperative agreements U01-CA98233 to D.J.H., U01-CA98710 to S.M.G., U01-CA98216 to E.R., and U01-CA98758 to B.E.H., and Intramural Research Program of NIH/National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics). CAPS GWAS study was supported by the Swedish Cancer Foundation (grant no 09-0677, 11-484, 12-823), the Cancer Risk Prediction Center (CRisP; www.crispcenter.org), a Linneus Centre (Contract ID 70867902) financed by the Swedish Research Council, Swedish Research Council (grant no K2010-70 × -20430-04-3, 2014-2269). The Hannover Prostate Cancer Study was supported by the Lower Saxonian Cancer Society. PEGASUS was supported by the Intramural Research Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health. RAPPER was supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Center, Cancer Research UK (C147/A25254, C1094/A18504) and the EU’s 7th Framework Programme Grant/Agreement no 60186. Overall: this research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource (application number 16549). NHS is supported by UM1 CA186107 (NHS cohort infrastructure grant), P01 CA87969, and R01 CA49449. NHSII is supported by UM1 CA176726 (NHSII cohort infrastructure grant), and R01-CA67262. A.L.K. is supported by R01 MH107649. We would like to thank the participants and staff of the NHS and NHSII for their valuable contributions as well as the following state cancer registries for their help: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, WY. The authors assume full responsibility for analyses and interpretation of these data.

DNase I hypersensitive sites (DHS) are abundant in regulatory elements, such as promoter, enhancer and transcription factor binding sites. Many studies have revealed that disease-associated variants were concentrated in DHS-related regions. However, limited studies are available on the roles of DHS-related variants in lung cancer. In this study, we performed a large-scale case–control study with 20 871 lung cancer cases and 15 971 controls to evaluate the associations between regulatory genetic variants in DHS and lung cancer susceptibility. The expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis and pathway-enrichment analysis were performed to identify the possible target genes and pathways. In addition, we performed motif-based analysis to explore the lung-cancer-related motifs using sequence kernel association test. Two novel variants, rs186332 in 20q13.3 (C>T, odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.10–1.24, P = 8.45 × 10−7) and rs4839323 in 1p13.2 (T>C, OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89–0.95, P = 1.02 × 10−6) showed significant association with lung cancer risk. The eQTL analysis suggested that these two SNPs might regulate the expression of MRGBP and SLC16A1, respectively. What’s more, the expression of both MRGBP and SLC16A1 was aberrantly elevated in lung tumor tissues. The motif-based analysis identified 10 motifs related to the risk of lung cancer (P < 1.71 × 10−4). Our findings suggested that variants in DHS might modify lung cancer susceptibility through regulating the expression of surrounding genes. This study provided us a deeper insight into the roles of DHS-related genetic variants for lung cancer.

Background A healthy lifestyle may reduce the risk of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) recurrence. The objective of this study was to obtain insight in whether NMIBC patients are aware of possible risk factors for (bladder) cancer, adhere to lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention, received lifestyle advice from their physician, and what their attitudes are towards physicians giving lifestyle advice. Methods Patients with newly diagnosed NMIBC between 2014 and 2017 participating in the UroLife cohort study completed questionnaires at 6 weeks and 3 months after diagnosis about awareness of (bladder) cancer risk factors, adherence to lifestyle recommendations, reception of lifestyle advice, and attitudes towards physicians giving lifestyle advice. Results A total of 969 NMIBC patients were included (response rate 46%). Most patients (89%) were aware that smoking is a risk factor for cancer, and knowledge of other risk factors for cancer varied between 29% (low fruit and vegetable consumption) and 67% (overweight). Adherence to cancer prevention recommendations varied between 34% (body weight) and 85% (smoking). Of the smokers, 70% reported they were advised to quit, and 36% quit smoking in the three months before or after diagnosis. Only 21% of all patients indicated they received other lifestyle advice. More than 80% of patients had a positive attitude towards receiving lifestyle advice from their physician. Conclusions These findings show that awareness of (bladder) cancer risk factors and adherence to cancer prevention lifestyle recommendations among NMIBC patients is low and that physicians’ information provision should be improved.

Non-syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (nsCL/P) ranks among the most common human congenital malformations, and has a multifactorial background in which both exogenous and genetic risk factors act in concert. The present report describes a genome-wide association study (GWAS) involving a total of 285 nsCL/P patients and 1212 controls from the Netherlands and Belgium. Twenty of the 40 previously reported nsC/LP susceptibility loci were replicated, which underlined the validity of this sample. SNV-based analysis of the data identified an as yet unreported suggestive locus at chromosome 16p12.1 (p-value of the lead SNV: 4.17 &times, 10&minus, 7). This association was replicated in two of three patient/control replication series (Central European and Yemeni). Gene analysis of the GWAS data prioritized SH3PXD2A at chromosome 10q24.33 as a candidate gene for nsCL/P. To date, support for this gene as a cleft gene has been restricted to data from zebrafish and a knockout mouse model. The present GWAS was the first to implicate SH3PXD2A in non-syndromic cleft formation in humans. In summary, although performed in a relatively small sample, the present GWAS generated novel insights into nsCL/P etiology.

IntroductionAnorectal malformations (ARM) are rare congenital malformations, resulting from disturbed hindgut development. A genetic etiology has been suggested, but evidence for the involvement of specific genes is scarce. We evaluated the contribution of rare and low-frequency coding variants in ARM etiology, assuming a multifactorial model.MethodsWe analyzed 568 Caucasian ARM patients and 1,860 population-based controls using the Illumina Human Exome Beadchip array, which contains >240,000 rare and low-frequency coding variants. GenomeStudio clustering and calling was followed by re-calling of 'no-calls' using zCall for patients and controls simultaneously. Single variant and gene-based analyses were performed to identify statistically significant associations, applying Bonferroni correction. Following an extra quality control step, candidate variants were selected for validation using Sanger sequencing.ResultsWhen we applied a MAF of >= 1.0%, no variants or genes showed statistically significant associations with ARM. Using a MAF cut-off at 0.4%, 13 variants initially reached statistical significance, but had to be discarded upon further inspection: ten variants represented calling errors of the software, while the minor alleles of the remaining three variants were not confirmed by Sanger sequencing.ConclusionOur results show that rare and low-frequency coding variants with large effect sizes, present on the exome chip do not contribute to ARM etiology.

Contains fulltext : 171700.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: The definition of hereditary prostate cancer (HPC) is based on family history and age at onset. Intuitively, HPC is a serious subtype of prostate cancer but there are only limited data on the clinical phenotype of HPC. Here, we aimed to compare the prognosis of HPC to the sporadic form of prostate cancer (SPC). METHODS: HPC patients were identified through a national registry of HPC families in the Netherlands, selecting patients diagnosed from the year 2000 onward (n = 324). SPC patients were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) between 2003 and 2006 for a population-based study into the genetic susceptibility of PC (n = 1,664). Detailed clinical data were collected by NCR-registrars, using a standardized registration form. Follow-up extended up to the end of 2013. Differences between the groups were evaluated by cross-tabulations and tested for statistical significance while accounting for familial dependency of observations by GEE. Differences in progression-free and overall survival were evaluated using chi(2) testing with GEE in a proportional-hazards model. RESULTS: HPC patients were on average 3 years younger at diagnosis, had lower PSA values, lower Gleason scores, and more often locally confined disease. Of the HPC patients, 35% had high-risk disease (NICE-criteria) versus 51% of the SPC patients. HPC patients were less often treated with active surveillance. Kaplan-Meier 5-year progression-free survival after radical prostatectomy was comparable for HPC (78%) and SPC (74%; P = 0.30). The 5-year overall survival was 85% (95%CI 81-89%) for HPC versus 80% (95%CI 78-82%) for SPC (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: HPC has a favorable clinical phenotype but patients more often underwent radical treatment. The major limitation of HPC is the absence of a genetics-based definition of HPC, which may lead to over-diagnosis of PC in men with a family history of prostate cancer. The HPC definition should, therefore, be re-evaluated, aiming at a reduction of over-diagnosis and overtreatment among men with multiple relatives diagnosed with PC. Prostate 76:897-904, 2016. (c) 2016 The Authors. The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background: A proportion of the genetic variants involved in susceptibility to Hodgkin lymphoma differ by the tumor's Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) status, particularly within the MHC region. Methods: We have conducted an SNP imputation study of the MHC region, considering tumor EBV status in 1,200 classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) cases and 5,726 control subjects of European origin. Notable findings were genotyped in an independent study population of 468 cHL cases and 551 controls. Results: We identified and subsequently replicated a novel association between a common genetic variant rs6457715 and cHL. Although strongly associated with EBV-positive cHL [OR, 2.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.83–2.97; P = 7 × 10–12], there was little evidence for association between rs6457715 and the EBV-negative subgroup of cHL (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92–1.21), indicating that this association was specific to the EBV-positive subgroup (Phet < P = 10−8). Furthermore, the association was limited to EBV-positive cHL subgroups within mixed cell (MCHL) and nodular sclerosis subtypes (NSHL), suggesting that the association is independent of histologic subtype of cHL. Conclusions: rs6457715, located near the HLA-DPB1 gene, is associated with EBV-positive cHL and suggests this region as a novel susceptibility locus for cHL. Impact: This expands the number of genetic variants that are associated with cHL and provides additional evidence for a critical and specific role of EBV in the etiology of this disease. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(12); 1838–43. ©2015 AACR.

Contains fulltext : 229210.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Despite treatment with radical cystectomy, patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) have a poor survival. It has been reported that survival is worse in NMIBC patients who progressed to MIBC in comparison to patients with de novo MIBC. The objective of this study was to compare survival of progressive versus de novo MIBC. Secondary objective was to explain this difference in survival by clinicopathological factors. METHODS: 431 patients with MIBC who underwent radical cystectomy between 1998 and 2016 in the Radboudumc, Nijmegen, were retrospectively analyzed. 313 patients were identified with de novo MIBC and 118 with progressive MIBC. RESULTS: 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) of patients with progressive MIBC was 37% and 20%, respectively. Patients with de novo MIBC had significantly better survival, with a 5- and 10-year OS of 49% and 39%, respectively. Patients with progressive MIBC were more frequently diagnosed with concomitant carcinoma in situ and positive surgical margins in bladder, ureters or urethra. In multivariable analysis that adjusted for these factors, progressive MIBC was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.40 (0.99 - 1.98). Kaplan-Meier survival curves show a detrimental effect of progressive MIBC in patients with pT2 versus pT3-4 tumors and in patients with negative versus positive surgical margins. In multivariable analysis, this effect modification disappeared. CONCLUSIONS: Progressive MIBC is associated with poorer survival than de novo MIBC. Because most patients with progressive MIBC had a history of high risk NMIBC, considering radical cystectomy is most important in the highest risk NMIBC.

Importance To date, several targeted genetic studies on chronic central serous chorioretinopathy (cCSC) have been performed; however, unbiased genome-wide studies into the genetics of cCSC have not been reported. To discover new genetic loci associated with cCSC and to better understand the causative mechanism of this disease, we performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) on patients with cCSC. Objective To discover new genetic loci and pathways associated with cCSC and to predict the association of genetic variants with gene expression in patients with cCSC. Design, Setting, and Participants This case-control GWAS was completed in the general community, 3 referral university medical centers, and outpatient care on Europeans individuals with cCSC and population-based control participants. Genotype data was collected from May 2013 to August 2017, and data analysis occurred from August 2017 to November 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures Associations of single-nucleotide polymorphisms, haplotypes, genetic pathways, and predicted gene expression with cCSC. Results A total of 521 patients with cCSC (median age, 51 years; interquartile range [IQR], 44-59 years; 420 [80.6%] male) and 3577 European population-based control participants (median age, 52 years; IQR, 37-71 years; 1630 [45.6%] male) were included. One locus on chromosome 1 at the complement factor H ( CFH) gene reached genome-wide significance and was associated with an increased risk of cCSC (rs1329428; odds ratio [OR], 1.57 [95% CI, 1.38-1.80]; P = 3.12 × 10 −11 ). The CFH haplotypes H1 and H3 were protective for cCSC (H1: OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.53-0.77]; P = 2.18 × 10 −6 ; H3: OR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.42-0.70]; P = 2.49 × 10 −6 ), whereas haplotypes H2, H4, H5, and the aggregate of rare CFH haplotypes conferred increased risk (H2: OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.30-1.89]; P = 2.18 × 10 −6 ; H4: OR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.13-1.80]; P = 2.49 × 10 −3 ; H5: OR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.36-2.39]; P = 4.61 × 10 −5 ; rare haplotypes: OR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.43-2.77]; P = 4.59 × 10 −5 ). Pathway analyses showed involvement of the complement cascade and alternative open reading frame ( ARF) pathway in cCSC. Using PrediXcan, we identified changes in predicted expression of complement genes CFH, complement factor H related 1 ( CFHR1 ), complement factor related 4 ( CFHR4 ), and membrane cofactor protein ( MCP / CD46 ). Additionally, the potassium sodium-activated channel subfamily T member 2 ( KCNT2 ) and tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily member 10a (TNFRSF10A) genes were differentially expressed in patients with cCSC. Conclusions and Relevance In this GWAS on cCSC, we identified a locus on chromosome 1 at the CFH gene that was significantly associated with cCSC, and we report protective and risk-conferring haplotypes in this gene. Pathway analyses were enriched for complement genes, and gene expression analysis suggests a role for CFH, CFHR1, CFHR4, CD46, KCNT2 , and TNFRSF10A in the disease. Taken together, these results underscore the potential importance of the complement pathway in the causative mechanisms of cCSC.

Previous in vitro and case–control studies have found an association between the insulin‐like growth factor (IGF)‐axis and bladder cancer risk. Circulating concentrations of IGF‐I have also been found to be associated with an increased risk of several cancer types; however, the relationship between pre‐diagnostic circulating IGF‐I concentrations and bladder cancer has never been studied prospectively. We investigated the association of pre‐diagnostic plasma concentrations of IGF‐I with risk of overall bladder cancer and urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) in a case–control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. A total of 843 men and women diagnosed with bladder cancer between 1992 and 2005 were matched with 843 controls by recruitment centre, sex, age at recruitment, date of blood collection, duration of follow‐up, time of day and fasting status at blood collection using an incidence density sampling protocol. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using conditional logistic regression with adjustment for smoking status. No association was found between pre‐diagnostic circulating IGF‐I concentration and overall bladder cancer risk (adjusted OR for highest versus lowest fourth: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.66–1.24, p trend = 0.40) or UCC (n of cases = 776; 0.91, 0.65–1.26, p trend = 0.40). There was no significant evidence of heterogeneity in the association of IGF‐I with bladder cancer risk by tumour aggressiveness, sex, smoking status, or by time between blood collection and diagnosis (p heterogeneity > 0.05 for all). This first prospective study indicates no evidence of an association between plasma IGF‐I concentrations and bladder cancer risk., What's new? Past prospective studies have shown a positive association between circulating insulin‐like growth factor I (IGF‐I) concentration and colorectal, prostate, and breast cancer risk. However, the association between circulating IGF‐I concentrations and bladder cancer risk remains uncertain. Using a nested‐case control study with 843 bladder cancer cases across 9 European countries, for the first time here the authors examined prospectively the association between pre‐diagnostic circulating IGF‐I concentrations and bladder cancer risk. IGF‐I was not associated with overall risk of bladder cancer or urothelial cell carcinoma. Further prospective data, including on tumour aggressiveness, are required to examine the association in greater detail.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified >250 loci for body mass index (BMI), implicating pathways related to neuronal biology. Most GWAS loci represent clusters of common, noncoding variants from which pinpointing causal genes remains challenging. Here we combined data from 718,734 individuals to discover rare and low-frequency (minor allele frequency (MAF) < 5%) coding variants associated with BMI. We identified 14 coding variants in 13 genes, of which 8 variants were in genes (ZBTB7B, ACHE, RAPGEF3, RAB21, ZFHX3, ENTPD6, ZFR2 and ZNF169) newly implicated in human obesity, 2 variants were in genes (MC4R and KSR2) previously observed to be mutated in extreme obesity and 2 variants were in GIPR. The effect sizes of rare variants are ~10 times larger than those of common variants, with the largest effect observed in carriers of an MC4R mutation introducing a stop codon (p.Tyr35Ter, MAF = 0.01%), who weighed ~7 kg more than non-carriers. Pathway analyses based on the variants associated with BMI confirm enrichment of neuronal genes and provide new evidence for adipocyte and energy expenditure biology, widening the potential of genetically supported therapeutic targets in obesity.

CAPUA study was supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03-0365, and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02-67 and FICYT IB09-133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA), of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiología y Salud Pública. CIBERESP, SPAIN (...), Ferreiro-Iglesias, A., Lesseur, C., McKay, J., Hung, R.J., Han, Y., Zong, X., Christiani, D., Johansson, M., Xiao, X., Li, Y., Qian, D.C., Ji, X., Liu, G., Caporaso, N., Scelo, G., Zaridze, D., Mukeriya, A., Kontic, M., Ognjanovic, S., Lissowska, J., Szołkowska, M., Swiatkowska, B., Janout, V., Holcatova, I., Bolca, C., Savic, M., Ognjanovic, M., Bojesen, S.E., Wu, X., Albanes, D., Aldrich, M.C., Tardon, A., Fernandez-Somoano, A., Fernandez-Tardon, G., Le Marchand, L., Rennert, G., Chen, C., Doherty, J., Goodman, G., Bickeböller, H., Wichmann, H.-E., Risch, A., Rosenberger, A., Shen, H., Dai, J., Field, J.K., Davies, M., Woll, P., Teare, M.D., Kiemeney, L.A., van der Heijden, E.H.F.M., Yuan, J.-M., Hong, Y.-C., Haugen, A., Zienolddiny, S., Lam, S., Tsao, M.-S., Johansson, M., Grankvist, K., Schabath, M.B., Andrew, A., Duell, E., Melander, O., Brunnström, H., Lazarus, P., Arnold, S., Slone, S., Byun, J., Kamal, A., Zhu, D., Landi, M.T., Amos, C.I., Brennan, P.

Supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03-0365, and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02-67 and FICYT IB09-133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA) of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiologia y Salud Pública., Ji, X., Bossé, Y., Landi, M.T., Gui, J., Xiao, X., Qian, D., Joubert, P., Lamontagne, M., Li, Y., Gorlov, I., de Biasi, M., Han, Y., Gorlova, O., Hung, R.J., Wu, X., McKay, J., Zong, X., Carreras-Torres, R., Christiani, D.C., Caporaso, N., Johansson, M., Liu, G., Bojesen, S.E., Le Marchand, L., Albanes, D., Bickeböller, H., Aldrich, M.C., Bush, W.S., Tardon, A., Rennert, G., Chen, C., Teare, M.D., Field, J.K., Kiemeney, L.A., Lazarus, P., Haugen, A., Lam, S., Schabath, M.B.,,rew, A.S., Shen, H., Hong, Y.-C., Yuan, J.-M., Bertazzi, P.A., Pesatori, A.C., Ye, Y., Diao, N., Su, L., Zhang, R., Brhane, Y., Leighl, N., Johansen, J.S., Mellemgaard, A., Saliba, W., Haiman, C., Wilkens, L., Fernandez-Somoano, A., Fernandez-Tardon, G., van der Heijden, E.H.F.M., Kim, J.H., Dai, J., Hu, Z., Davies, M.P.A., Marcus, M.W., Brunnström, H., Manjer, J., Melander, O., Muller, D.C., Overvad, K., Trichopoulou, A., Tumino, R., Doherty, J., Goodman, G.E., Cox, A., Taylor, F., Woll, P., Brüske, I., Manz, J., Muley, T., Risch, A., Rosenberger, A., Grankvist, K., Johansson, M., Shepherd, F., Tsao, M.-S., Arnold, S.M., Haura, E.B., Bolca, C., Holcatova, I., Janout, V., Kontic, M., Lissowska, J., Mukeria, A., Ognjanovic, S., Orlowski, T.M., Scelo, G., Swiatkowska, B., Zaridze, D., Bakke, P., Skaug, V., Zienolddiny, S., Duell, E.J., Butler, L.M., Koh, W.-P., Gao, Y.-T., Houlston, R., McLaughlin, J., Stevens, V., Nickle, D.C., Obeidat, M., Timens, W., Zhu, B., Song, L., Artigas, M.S., Tobin, M.D., Wain, L.V., Gu, F., Byun, J., Kamal, A., Zhu, D., Tyndale, R.F., Wei, W.-Q., Chanock, S., Brennan, P., Amos, C.I.

Contains fulltext : 193359.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Alcohol and tobacco use are heritable phenotypes. However, only a small number of common genetic variants have been identified, and common variants account for a modest proportion of the heritability. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the role of low-frequency and rare variants in alcohol and tobacco use. METHODS: We meta-analyzed ExomeChip association results from eight discovery cohorts and included 12,466 subjects and 7432 smokers in the analysis of alcohol consumption and tobacco use, respectively. The ExomeChip interrogates low-frequency and rare exonic variants, and in addition a small pool of common variants. We investigated top variants in an independent sample in which ICD-9 diagnoses of "alcoholism" (N=25,508) and "tobacco use disorder" (N=27,068) had been assessed. In addition to the single variant analysis, we performed gene-based, polygenic risk score (PRS), and pathway analyses. RESULTS: The meta-analysis did not yield exome-wide significant results. When we jointly analyzed our top results with the independent sample, no low-frequency or rare variants reached significance for alcohol consumption or tobacco use. However, two common variants that were present on the ExomeChip, rs16969968 (p=2.39x10(-7)) and rs8034191 (p=6.31x10(-7)) located in CHRNA5 and AGPHD1 at 15q25.1, showed evidence for association with tobacco use. DISCUSSION: Low-frequency and rare exonic variants with large effects do not play a major role in alcohol and tobacco use, nor does the aggregate effect of ExomeChip variants. However, our results confirmed the role of the CHRNA5-CHRNA3-CHRNB4 cluster of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit genes in tobacco use. 8 p.

Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) and autistic traits in the general population may share genetic susceptibility factors. In this study, we investigated such potential overlap based on common genetic variants. We developed and validated a self-report questionnaire of autistic traits in adults. We then conducted genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of six trait scores derived from the questionnaire through exploratory factor analysis in 1981 adults from the general population. Using the results from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium GWAS of ASDs, we observed genetic sharing between ASDs and the autistic traits 'childhood behavior', 'rigidity' and 'attention to detail'. Gene-set analysis subsequently identified 'rigidity' to be significantly associated with a network of ASD gene-encoded proteins that regulates neurite outgrowth. Gene-wide association with the well-established ASD gene MET reached significance. Taken together, our findings provide evidence for an overlapping genetic and biological etiology underlying ASDs and autistic population traits, which suggests that genetic studies in the general population may yield novel ASD genes.