Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Sep 12;24(11):1801–1803. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0596

Pleiotropic analysis of cancer risk loci on esophageal adenocarcinoma risk

Eunjung Lee 1, Daniel O Stram 1, Weronica E Ek 2, Lynn E Onstad 3, Stuart MacGregor 2, Puya Gharahkhani 2, Weimin Ye 4, Jesper Lagergren 5,6, Nicholas J Shaheen 7, Liam J Murray 8, Laura J Hardie 9, Marilie D Gammon 10, Wong-Ho Chow 11, Harvey A Risch 12, Douglas A Corley 13,14, David M Levine 15, David C Whiteman 16, Leslie Bernstein 17, Nigel C Bird 18, Thomas L Vaughan 3, Anna H Wu 1
PMCID: PMC4648999  NIHMSID: NIHMS728139  PMID: 26364162

Abstract

Background

Several cancer-associated loci identified from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been associated with risks of multiple cancer sites, suggesting pleiotropic effects. We investigated whether GWAS-identified risk variants for other common cancers are associated with risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) or its precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE).

Methods

We examined the associations between risks of EA and BE and 387 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that have been associated with risks of other cancers, by using genotype imputation data on 2,163 control participants and 3,885 (1,501 EA and 2,384 BE) case patients from the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Genetic Susceptibility Study, and investigated effect modification by smoking history, body mass index (BMI), and reflux/heartburn.

Results

After correcting for multiple testing, none of the tested 387 SNPs were statistically significantly associated with risk of EA or BE. No evidence of effect modification by smoking, BMI, or reflux/heartburn was observed.

Conclusions

Genetic risk variants for common cancers identified from GWAS appear not to be associated with risks of EA or BE.

Impact

To our knowledge, this is the first investigation of pleiotropic genetic associations with risks of EA and BE.

Keywords: Pleiotropic analysis, esophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett's esophagus

Introduction

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) has increased substantially over the past four decades in western countries (1). Most EA arises within Barrett's esophagus (BE), a metaplastic transformation of the lower esophageal lining (1). Gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), high body mass index (BMI), and tobacco use are well-established risk factors for both EA and BE, although with some variations in the magnitudes of these associations. These risk factors, together with low consumption of fruits and vegetables, may explain about 70% of the EA cases (see references in (1)). Genetic factors are thought to play an etiologic role based on familial clustering (1). In addition, results from the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Genetic Susceptibility Study (BEAGESS) support a shared genetic susceptibility of EA and BE (2). In further analysis of the BEAGESS data, an estimated 25% of the variation in EA risk is due to common genetic variants (1). However, from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to date, only 7 loci have been identified to be associated with risk of EA or BE (2, 3), and the effects of the individual genetic variants are small (2, 3). Motivated by studies investigating pleiotropic associations of GWAS-identified variants, some of which work has identified additional risk-associated loci for colorectal, endometrial, and pancreatic cancers (see references in (4)), we investigated in BEAGESS whether cancer-GWAS-identified variants could also influence the risk of EA and BE.

Materials and Methods

Details of the design and methods of BEAGESS have been described elsewhere (2). In brief, this ancillary study included 1,504 EA and 2,384 BE case patients and 2,163 control participants, all of European descent and for whom genome-wide genotyping and imputation was conducted and phenotype covariate data were available. We identified 407 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that have previously been associated with one or more cancer sites at a P-value<5×10-8 in the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) GWAS catalog as of March 2014 (5). Genotyping was done using the Illumina Human Omni1-Quad platform. Imputation was performed using MaCH and Minimac software and a European reference panel from the 1000 Genomes project (2). This analysis included 387 of the 407 SNPs that had minor allele frequencies (MAF) >1% and passed genotyping and imputation quality control (e.g. imputation r2≥0.3) (2). We investigated associations with EA, BE, and for these conditions combined (EA/BE). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using unconditional logistic regression of case status on additive SNP genotype score, with adjustments for age, sex, and the first four principal components analysis eigenvectors (2). We performed stratum-specific analyses by smoking status (never, former, or current), smoking intensity (never, <30 pack-years, or ≥30 pack-years), BMI (<25, 25-<30, or ≥30 kg/m2), and history of reflux/heartburn (yes, no), and tested for the statistical significance of the interaction (product) term. Some SNPs included in the NHGRI catalog are in linkage disequilibrium with each other. Thus, we calculated ‘P-values adjusted for correlated tests’ to account for multiple testing of correlated SNPs (6). The adjusted P values (Padj) < 0.05 are considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using SAS 9.2 (SAS Inc., NC) and R. All P values are two sided.

Results

After correcting for multiple testing, none of the 387 SNPs were associated with risk of EA, BE, or EA/BE combined (Table 1 and Supplementary Table S1). No evidence was seen for effect modification by smoking status or intensity, BMI, or reflux/heartburn history (data not shown).

Table 1.

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), Barrett's esophagus (BE) risk, and EA/BE, with a nominal P-value < 0.01 and in the same direction as the GWAS-identified SNPs reported in the NHGRI§.

SNP (major/minor allele) MAF Chromosome position NHGRI catalog BEAGESS results


Risk allele Odds ratios Cancer site Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) P (Padj*)
SNPs associated with EA
rs7040024 (A/C) 0.24 chr9: 845516 A 1.70 Testicular 1.16 (1.04-1.30) 0.008 (0.88)
rs4712653 (T/C) 0.45 chr6: 22125964 C 1.40 Neuroblastoma 1.14 (1.03-1.25) 0.008 (0.89)

SNPs associated with BE
rs616488 (A/G) 0.34 chr1: 10566215 A 1.10 Breast 1.14 (1.05-1.25) 0.003 (0.59)
rs1270884 (G/A) 0.50 chr12: 114685571 A 1.07 Prostate 1.12 (1.03-1.22) 0.008 (0.88)

SNPs associated with EA/BE
rs616488 (A/G) 0.34 chr1: 10566215 A 1.10 Breast 1.13 (1.05-1.23) 0.002 (0.41)
rs1270884 (G/A) 0.50 chr12: 114685571 A 1.07 Prostate 1.12 (1.04-1.21) 0.004 (0.64)
rs2494938 (A/G) 0.48 chr6: 40536128 A 1.15/1.18 Multiple cancers / NCGC†† 1.11 (1.03-1.20) 0.007 (0.84)
rs527616 (G/C) 0.36 chr18: 24337424 G 1.05 Breast 1.12 (1.03-1.21) 0.008 (0.87)

Abbreviations: MAF, minor allele frequency

§

Results from 11 subgroup-specific analyses by smoking status and intensity, BMI, and reflux/heartburn are not presented. Padj values for subgroup-specific analyses were further multiplied by 11; the smallest P adj from subgroup-specific analyses was 0.22. All P for interaction values were above 0.05 after Bonferroni correction (i.e. multiplied by total number of interaction terms examined (387 × 4 = 1,548).

Odds ratios for EA, BE, or EA/BE per risk allele reported in the NHGRI catalog

††

Non-cardia gastric cancer

*

P-values were corrected for multiple testing by calculating ‘P-values adjusted for correlated tests’ (6).

Discussion

Studies investigating pleiotropic effects of GWAS-identified risk variants have revealed additional risk loci for endometrial, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer, but not for estrogen-receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer (ER-positive cancers were not investigated), prostate cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (4, 7-9). Some studies, including those of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, endometrial cancer, and colorectal cancer, investigated cancer GWAS hits while studies of pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and ER-negative breast cancer investigated cancer and non-cancer GWAS-hits (4, 7-9). Our investigation based on cancer GWAS SNPs is not supportive of shared genetic susceptibility between EA/BE and other cancer sites. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate pleiotropic associations of cancer GWAS loci on risks of EA and BE. Although our study sample size is moderate, the combined number of EA and BE cases is larger than that of most previous studies on cancer pleiotropy (4, 7-9). For SNPs with MAF of 0.3 (the average MAF of all tested SNPs), we had 80% statistical power to detect an OR of 1.21 per minor allele for analyses on EA/BE combined, with a Bonferroni-corrected type I error rate of 5%. Given that nearly one-half (47%) of the NHGRI-catalogued cancer-GWAS SNPs were from studies of more common cancers (Supplementary Table S1), it may be fruitful to repeat this analysis when additional GWAS loci identified from less common cancers become available.

Supplementary Material

1

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Yvonne Romero for her contributions to the BEACON consortium. We thank Drs. Christian Abnet and Matthew Buas for their helpful discussion and suggestions regarding analyses.

Financial support: This work was primarily funded by a US NIH grant (R01CA136725) to T. Vaughan and D. Whiteman. E. Lee, D. Stram, W. Ek, L. Onstad, W. Ye, J. Lagergren, N. Shaheen, L. Murray, L. Hardie, M. Gammon, H. Risch, D. Corley, D. Levine, D. Whiteman, L. Bernstein, N. Bird, T. Vaughan, and A. Wu were supported by R01CA136725. T. Vaughan is also supported by grant K05CA124911. D. Whiteman is supported by a Research Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC). S. MacGregor is supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship. Additional funding sources for individual studies included in the BEACON GWAS, and for BEACON investigators, have been acknowledged.

References

  • 1.Ek WE, Levine DM, D'Amato M, Pedersen NL, Magnusson PK, Bresso F, et al. Germline genetic contributions to risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett's esophagus, and gastroesophageal reflux. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:1711–8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Levine DM, Ek WE, Zhang R, Liu X, Onstad L, Sather C, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility loci for esophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's esophagus. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1487–93. doi: 10.1038/ng.2796. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Palles C, Chegwidden L, Li X, Findlay JM, Farnham G, Castro Giner F, et al. Polymorphisms near TBX5 and GDF7 are associated with increased risk for Barrett's esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2015;148:367–78. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.10.041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Panagiotou OA, Travis RC, Campa D, Berndt SI, Lindstrom S, Kraft P, et al. A Genome-wide Pleiotropy Scan for Prostate Cancer Risk. Eur Urol. 2015;67:649–57. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.NHGRI GWAS catalog. [[cited 2014 March 1]]; Available from: www.genome.gov/gwastudies.
  • 6.Conneely KN, Boehnke M. So Many Correlated Tests, So Little Time! Rapid Adjustment of P Values for Multiple Correlated Tests. Am J Hum Genet. 2007;81 doi: 10.1086/522036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Setiawan VW, Schumacher F, Prescott J, Haessler J, Malinowski J, Wentzensen N, et al. Cross-cancer pleiotropic analysis of endometrial cancer: PAGE and E2C2 consortia. Carcinogenesis. 2014;35:2068–73. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgu107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lim U, Kocarnik JM, Bush WS, Matise TC, Caberto C, Park SL, et al. Pleiotropy of cancer susceptibility variants on the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the PAGE consortium. PLoS One. 2014;9:e89791. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Campa D, Barrdahl M, Tsilidis KK, Severi G, Diver WR, Siddiq A, et al. A genome-wide “pleiotropy scan” does not identify new susceptibility loci for estrogen receptor negative breast cancer. PLoS One. 2014;9:e85955. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1

RESOURCES