Re-weighting MC1R, ASIP and IRF4 risk variants optimises polygenic risk scores for keratinocyte cancer stratification in solid organ transplant recipients.
Mathias SeviiriiD, Matthew H. LawiD, Catherine M. OlseniD, David C. WhitemaniD, Adèle C. GreeniD, Stuart MacGregoriD
Abstract
IntroductionSolid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are at much higher risk of developing squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC), compared to the general population. Previous studies have derived genetics-based predictors (polygenic risk scores, PRS) of SCC and BCC risk in SOTRs by assuming that genetic risk variants act in the same way in the general population as in SOTRs, but this assumption has not been fully tested. ObjectiveTo investigate whether known genetic risk variants for SCC and BCC have different effect sizes in SOTRs versus in non-transplantees, and if a re-weighted PRS would improve risk prediction. MethodsWe conducted genome-wide association studies for SCC and BCC separately in the non-transplant general population and in SOTRs, and compared the risks associated with selected common genetic variants for KC risk in SOTR vs non-transplant individuals from the UK Biobank. For regions with an increased log odds ratio in SOTRs, PRSs including these weights were validated in the QSkin study, and applied to the Australian STAR SOTR cohort. ResultsEffect sizes for functional variants in MC1R (rs1805007), ASIP (rs6059655), and IRF4 (rs12203592) were much more strongly associated with the risk of KC in SOTRs than in non-transplantees. The proportional increase in the effect sizes ranged from 1.9-fold for rs6059655 and BCC risk (SOTRs log (OR)=0.49, 95%CI=0.00-0.98 vs log (OR)=0.26, 95%CI=0.24-0.30 in non-transplantees) to as high as 4.8-fold for rs1805007 and SCC risk (SOTR log (OR)=0.88, 95% CI=0.41-1.35 vs log (OR)=0.18, 95% CI=0.12-0.24 in non-transplantees). PRS with SOTR derived weights for these SNPs showed improved SCC/BCC risk stratification in the STAR Cohort, with the optimised PRS reclassifying 19% of SCC cases vs 8% using the standard PRS, and 18% of BCC cases vs 12% using the standard PRS. ConclusionEffect sizes for SCC and BCC risk for genetic variants in the MC1R, ASIP and IRF4 genes are elevated in SOTRs, and correctly weighting these variants improves risk stratification based on polygenic risk.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Precision Colorectal Cancer Screening with Polygenic Risk Score
Tõnis Tasa, Mikk Puustusmaa, … Peeter Padrik·medRxiv·Aug 19, 2020
- Exploring Various Polygenic Risk Scores for Skin Cancer in the Phenomes of the Michigan Genomics Initiative and the UK Biobank with a Visual Catalog: PRSWeb
Lars G. Fritsche, Lauren J. Beesley, … Bhramar Mukherjee·PLoS GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jun 13, 2019
- Assessment of Polygenic Architecture and Risk Prediction based on Common Variants Across Fourteen Cancers
Yan Zhang, Amber N. Hurson, … Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR)·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Jul 3, 2020
- Cross-Cancer Evaluation of Polygenic Risk Scores for 17 Cancer Types in Two Large Cohorts
Rebecca E. Graff, Taylor B. Cavazos, … Lori C. Sakoda·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Feb 12, 2021
- Ability of known colorectal cancer susceptibility SNPs to predict colorectal cancer risk: A cohort study within the UK Biobank
Aviv Gafni, Gillian S. Dite, … John Llewelyn Hopper·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Sep 15, 2021
- Pan-cancer analysis demonstrates that integrating polygenic risk scores with modifiable risk factors improves risk prediction
Linda Kachuri, Rebecca E. Graff, … Mattias Johansson·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Nov 27, 2020