Background

Ephrin receptor B2 (EPHB2) has recently been proposed as a novel tumor suppressor gene in colorectal cancer (CRC). Inactivation of the gene has been shown to correlate with progression of colorectal tumorigenesis, and somatic mutations have been reported in both colorectal and prostate tumors.

Methods

Here we have analyzed the EPHB2 gene for germline alterations in 101 individuals either with 1) CRC and a personal or family history of prostate cancer (PC), or 2) intestinal hyperplastic polyposis (HPP), a condition associated with malignant degeneration such as serrated adenoma and CRC.

Results

Four previously unknown missense alterations were observed, which may be associated with the disease phenotype. Two of the changes, I361V and R568W, were identified in Finnish CRC patients, but not in over 300 Finnish familial CRC or PC patients or more than 200 population-matched healthy controls. The third change, D861N, was observed in a UK HPP patient, but not in additional 40 UK HPP patients or in 200 UK healthy controls. The fourth change R80H, originally identified in a Finnish CRC patient, was also found in 1/106 familial CRC patients and in 9/281 healthy controls and is likely to be a neutral polymorphism.

Conclusion

We detected novel germline EPHB2 alterations in patients with colorectal tumors. The results suggest a limited role for these EPHB2 variants in colon tumor predisposition. Further studies including functional analyses are needed to confirm this.

BACKGROUND: Family history of prostate cancer (PCa) is a well-known risk factor, and both common and rare genetic variants are associated with the disease. OBJECTIVE: To detect new genetic variants associated with PCa, capitalizing on the role of family history and more aggressive PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A two-stage design was used. In stage one, whole-exome sequencing was used to identify potential risk alleles among affected men with a strong family history of disease or with more aggressive disease (491 cases and 429 controls). Aggressive disease was based on a sum of scores for Gleason score, node status, metastasis, tumor stage, prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, systemic recurrence, and time to PCa death. Genes identified in stage one were screened in stage two using a custom-capture design in an independent set of 2917 cases and 1899 controls. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Frequencies of genetic variants (singly or jointly in a gene) were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Eleven genes previously reported to be associated with PCa were detected (ATM, BRCA2, HOXB13, FAM111A, EMSY, HNF1B, KLK3, MSMB, PCAT1, PRSS3, and TERT), as well as an additional 10 novel genes (PABPC1, QK1, FAM114A1, MUC6, MYCBP2, RAPGEF4, RNASEH2B, ULK4, XPO7, and THAP3). Of these 10 novel genes, all but PABPC1 and ULK4 were primarily associated with the risk of aggressive PCa. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach demonstrates the advantage of gene sequencing in the search for genetic variants associated with PCa and the benefits of sampling patients with a strong family history of disease or an aggressive form of disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: Multiple genes are associated with prostate cancer (PCa) among men with a strong family history of this disease or among men with an aggressive form of PCa.

The vast majority of coding variants are rare, and assessment of the contribution of rare variants to complex traits is hampered by low statistical power and limited functional data. Improved methods for predicting the pathogenicity of rare coding variants are needed to facilitate the discovery of disease variants from exome sequencing studies. We developed REVEL (rare exome variant ensemble learner), an ensemble method for predicting the pathogenicity of missense variants on the basis of individual tools: MutPred, FATHMM, VEST, PolyPhen, SIFT, PROVEAN, MutationAssessor, MutationTaster, LRT, GERP, SiPhy, phyloP, and phastCons. REVEL was trained with recently discovered pathogenic and rare neutral missense variants, excluding those previously used to train its constituent tools. When applied to two independent test sets, REVEL had the best overall performance (p < 10-12) as compared to any individual tool and seven ensemble methods: MetaSVM, MetaLR, KGGSeq, Condel, CADD, DANN, and Eigen. Importantly, REVEL also had the best performance for distinguishing pathogenic from rare neutral variants with allele frequencies <0.5%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for REVEL was 0.046-0.182 higher in an independent test set of 935 recent SwissVar disease variants and 123,935 putatively neutral exome sequencing variants and 0.027-0.143 higher in an independent test set of 1,953 pathogenic and 2,406 benign variants recently reported in ClinVar than the AUCs for other ensemble methods. We provide pre-computed REVEL scores for all possible human missense variants to facilitate the identification of pathogenic variants in the sea of rare variants discovered as sequencing studies expand in scale.

Objectives

To develop and validate a genetic tool to predict age of onset of aggressive prostate cancer (PCa) and to guide decisions of who to screen and at what age.

Design

Analysis of genotype, PCa status, and age to select single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with diagnosis. These polymorphisms were incorporated into a survival analysis to estimate their effects on age at diagnosis of aggressive PCa (that is, not eligible for surveillance according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines; any of Gleason score ≥7, stage T3-T4, PSA (prostate specific antigen) concentration ≥10 ng/L, nodal metastasis, distant metastasis). The resulting polygenic hazard score is an assessment of individual genetic risk. The final model was applied to an independent dataset containing genotype and PSA screening data. The hazard score was calculated for these men to test prediction of survival free from PCa.

Setting

Multiple institutions that were members of international PRACTICAL consortium.

Participants

All consortium participants of European ancestry with known age, PCa status, and quality assured custom (iCOGS) array genotype data. The development dataset comprised 31 747 men; the validation dataset comprised 6411 men.

Main outcome measures

Prediction with hazard score of age of onset of aggressive cancer in validation set.

Results

In the independent validation set, the hazard score calculated from 54 single nucleotide polymorphisms was a highly significant predictor of age at diagnosis of aggressive cancer (z=11.2, P<10^-16). When men in the validation set with high scores (>98th centile) were compared with those with average scores (30th-70th centile), the hazard ratio for aggressive cancer was 2.9 (95% confidence interval 2.4 to 3.4). Inclusion of family history in a combined model did not improve prediction of onset of aggressive PCa (P=0.59), and polygenic hazard score performance remained high when family history was accounted for. Additionally, the positive predictive value of PSA screening for aggressive PCa was increased with increasing polygenic hazard score.

Conclusions

Polygenic hazard scores can be used for personalised genetic risk estimates that can predict for age at onset of aggressive PCa.

We determined the effect of sample size on performance of polygenic hazard score (PHS) models in prostate cancer. Age and genotypes were obtained for 40,861 men from the PRACTICAL consortium. The dataset included 201,590 SNPs per subject, and was split into training and testing sets. Established-SNP models considered 65 SNPs that had been previously associated with prostate cancer. Discovery-SNP models used stepwise selection to identify new SNPs. The performance of each PHS model was calculated for random sizes of the training set. The performance of a representative Established-SNP model was estimated for random sizes of the testing set. Mean HR_98/50 (hazard ratio of top 2% to average in test set) of the Established-SNP model increased from 1.73 [95% CI: 1.69-1.77] to 2.41 [2.40-2.43] when the number of training samples was increased from 1 thousand to 30 thousand. Corresponding HR_98/50 of the Discovery-SNP model increased from 1.05 [0.93-1.18] to 2.19 [2.16-2.23]. HR_98/50 of a representative Established-SNP model using testing set sample sizes of 0.6 thousand and 6 thousand observations were 1.78 [1.70-1.85] and 1.73 [1.71-1.76], respectively. We estimate that a study population of 20 thousand men is required to develop Discovery-SNP PHS models while 10 thousand men should be sufficient for Established-SNP models.

The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of the author Manuela Gago-Dominguez, which was incorrectly given as Manuela G. Dominguez. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.

Background

Prostate cancer risk stratification using single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) demonstrates considerable promise in men of European, Asian, and African genetic ancestries, but there is still need for increased accuracy. We evaluated whether including additional SNPs in a prostate cancer polygenic hazard score (PHS) would improve associations with clinically significant prostate cancer in multi-ancestry datasets.

Methods

In total, 299 SNPs previously associated with prostate cancer were evaluated for inclusion in a new PHS, using a LASSO-regularized Cox proportional hazards model in a training dataset of 72,181 men from the PRACTICAL Consortium. The PHS model was evaluated in four testing datasets: African ancestry, Asian ancestry, and two of European Ancestry-the Cohort of Swedish Men (COSM) and the ProtecT study. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare men with high versus low PHS for association with clinically significant, with any, and with fatal prostate cancer. The impact of genetic risk stratification on the positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was also measured.

Results

The final model (PHS290) had 290 SNPs with non-zero coefficients. Comparing, for example, the highest and lowest quintiles of PHS290, the hazard ratios (HRs) for clinically significant prostate cancer were 13.73 [95% CI: 12.43-15.16] in ProtecT, 7.07 [6.58-7.60] in African ancestry, 10.31 [9.58-11.11] in Asian ancestry, and 11.18 [10.34-12.09] in COSM. Similar results were seen for association with any and fatal prostate cancer. Without PHS stratification, the PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer in ProtecT was 0.12 (0.11-0.14). For the top 20% and top 5% of PHS290, the PPV of PSA testing was 0.19 (0.15-0.22) and 0.26 (0.19-0.33), respectively.

Conclusions

We demonstrate better genetic risk stratification for clinically significant prostate cancer than prior versions of PHS in multi-ancestry datasets. This is promising for implementing precision-medicine approaches to prostate cancer screening decisions in diverse populations.

Genetic models for cancer have been evaluated using almost exclusively European data, which could exacerbate health disparities. A polygenic hazard score (PHS₁) is associated with age at prostate cancer diagnosis and improves screening accuracy in Europeans. Here, we evaluate performance of PHS₂ (PHS₁, adapted for OncoArray) in a multi-ethnic dataset of 80,491 men (49,916 cases, 30,575 controls). PHS₂ is associated with age at diagnosis of any and aggressive (Gleason score ≥ 7, stage T3-T4, PSA ≥ 10 ng/mL, or nodal/distant metastasis) cancer and prostate-cancer-specific death. Associations with cancer are significant within European (n = 71,856), Asian (n = 2,382), and African (n = 6,253) genetic ancestries (p < 10^-180). Comparing the 80^th/20^th PHS₂ percentiles, hazard ratios for prostate cancer, aggressive cancer, and prostate-cancer-specific death are 5.32, 5.88, and 5.68, respectively. Within European, Asian, and African ancestries, hazard ratios for prostate cancer are: 5.54, 4.49, and 2.54, respectively. PHS₂ risk-stratifies men for any, aggressive, and fatal prostate cancer in a multi-ethnic dataset.

Background

Polygenic hazard scores (PHS) can identify individuals with increased risk of prostate cancer. We estimated the benefit of additional SNPs on performance of a previously validated PHS (PHS46).

Materials and method

180 SNPs, shown to be previously associated with prostate cancer, were used to develop a PHS model in men with European ancestry. A machine-learning approach, LASSO-regularized Cox regression, was used to select SNPs and to estimate their coefficients in the training set (75,596 men). Performance of the resulting model was evaluated in the testing/validation set (6,411 men) with two metrics: (1) hazard ratios (HRs) and (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. HRs were estimated between individuals with PHS in the top 5% to those in the middle 40% (HR95/50), top 20% to bottom 20% (HR80/20), and bottom 20% to middle 40% (HR20/50). PPV was calculated for the top 20% (PPV80) and top 5% (PPV95) of PHS as the fraction of individuals with elevated PSA that were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy.

Results

166 SNPs had non-zero coefficients in the Cox model (PHS166). All HR metrics showed significant improvements for PHS166 compared to PHS46: HR95/50 increased from 3.72 to 5.09, HR80/20 increased from 6.12 to 9.45, and HR20/50 decreased from 0.41 to 0.34. By contrast, no significant differences were observed in PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer.

Conclusions

Incorporating 120 additional SNPs (PHS166 vs PHS46) significantly improved HRs for prostate cancer, while PPV of PSA testing remained the same.

Background

A polygenic hazard score (PHS), the weighted sum of 54 SNP genotypes, was previously validated for association with clinically significant prostate cancer and for improved prostate cancer screening accuracy. Here, we assess the potential impact of PHS-informed screening.

Methods

United Kingdom population incidence data (Cancer Research United Kingdom) and data from the Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer were combined to estimate age-specific clinically significant prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score ≥7, stage T3-T4, PSA ≥10, or nodal/distant metastases). Using HRs estimated from the ProtecT prostate cancer trial, age-specific incidence rates were calculated for various PHS risk percentiles. Risk-equivalent age, when someone with a given PHS percentile has prostate cancer risk equivalent to an average 50-year-old man (50-year-standard risk), was derived from PHS and incidence data. Positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was calculated using PHS-adjusted age groups.

Results

The expected age at diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer differs by 19 years between the 1st and 99th PHS percentiles: men with PHS in the 1st and 99th percentiles reach the 50-year-standard risk level at ages 60 and 41, respectively. PPV of PSA was higher for men with higher PHS-adjusted age.

Conclusions

PHS provides individualized estimates of risk-equivalent age for clinically significant prostate cancer. Screening initiation could be adjusted by a man's PHS.

Impact

Personalized genetic risk assessments could inform prostate cancer screening decisions.