Skip to main content
Cancer Medicine logoLink to Cancer Medicine
. 2019 Apr 18;8(5):2503–2513. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1996

Evaluation of vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway target genes reveals UGT2A1/2 and EGFR polymorphisms associated with epithelial ovarian cancer in African American Women

Delores J Grant 1,, Ani Manichaikul 2, Anthony J Alberg 3, Elisa V Bandera 4, Jill Barnholtz‐Sloan 5, Melissa Bondy 6, Michele L Cote 7, Ellen Funkhouser 8, Patricia G Moorman 9, Lauren C Peres 2, Edward S Peters 10, Ann G Schwartz 7, Paul D Terry 11, Xin‐Qun Wang 12, Temitope O Keku 13, Cathrine Hoyo 14, Andrew Berchuck 15, Dale P Sandler 16, Jack A Taylor 16, Katie M O’Brien 16, Digna R Velez Edwards 17, Todd L Edwards 18, Alicia Beeghly‐Fadiel 19, Nicolas Wentzensen 20, Celeste Leigh Pearce 21,22, Anna H Wu 22, Alice S Whittemore 23,24, Valerie McGuire 23, Weiva Sieh 25,26, Joseph H Rothstein 25,26, Francesmary Modugno 27,28,29, Roberta Ness 30, Kirsten Moysich 31, Mary Anne Rossing 32,33, Jennifer A Doherty 34, Thomas A Sellers 35, Jennifer B Permuth‐Way 35, Alvaro N Monteiro 35, Douglas A Levine 36,37, Veronica Wendy Setiawan 38, Christopher A Haiman 38, Loic LeMarchand 39, Lynne R Wilkens 40, Beth Y Karlan 41, Usha Menon 42, Susan Ramus 43,44, Simon Gayther 45,46, Aleksandra Gentry‐Maharaj 42, Kathryn L Terry 47,48, Daniel W Cramer 47,48, Ellen L Goode 49, Melissa C Larson 50, Scott H Kaufmann 51, Rikki Cannioto 52, Kunle Odunsi 53, John L Etter 31, Ruea‐Yea Huang 54, Marcus Q Bernardini 55, Alicia A Tone 55, Taymaa May 55, Marc T Goodman 56,57, Pamela J Thompson 56, Michael E Carney 58, Shelley S Tworoger 59, Elizabeth M Poole 60, Diether Lambrechts 61,62, Ignace Vergote 63, Adriaan Vanderstichele 63, Els Van Nieuwenhuysen 63, Hoda Anton‐Culver 64, Argyrios Ziogas 65, James D Brenton 66, Line Bjorge 67,68, Helga B Salvensen 67,68, Lambertus A Kiemeney 69, Leon F A G Massuger 70, Tanja Pejovic 71,72, Amanda Bruegl 71,72, Melissa Moffitt 71,72, Linda Cook 73, Nhu D Le 74, Angela Brooks‐Wilson 75,76, Linda E Kelemen 77, Paul DP Pharoah 78, Honglin Song 79, Ian Campbell 80,81, Diana Eccles 82, Anna DeFazio 83,84, Catherine J Kennedy 83,84, Joellen M Schildkraut 12
PMCID: PMC6536963  PMID: 31001917

Abstract

An association between genetic variants in the vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene and epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) was previously reported in women of African ancestry (AA). We sought to examine associations between genetic variants in VDR and additional genes from vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway targets (EGFR, UGT1A, UGT2A1/2, UGT2B, CYP3A4/5, CYP2R1, CYP27B1, CYP24A1, CYP11A1, and GC). Genotyping was performed using the custom‐designed 533,631 SNP Illumina OncoArray with imputation to the 1,000 Genomes Phase 3 v5 reference set in 755 EOC cases, including 537 high‐grade serous (HGSOC), and 1,235 controls. All subjects are of African ancestry (AA). Logistic regression was performed to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We further evaluated statistical significance of selected SNPs using the Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP). A significant association with EOC was identified in the UGT2A1/2 region for the SNP rs10017134 (per allele OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2‐1.7, P = 1.2 × 10−6, BFDP = 0.02); and an association with HGSOC was identified in the EGFR region for the SNP rs114972508 (per allele OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.6‐3.4, P = 1.6 × 10−5, BFDP = 0.29) and in the UGT2A1/2 region again for rs1017134 (per allele OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2‐1.7, P = 2.3 × 10−5, BFDP = 0.23). Genetic variants in the EGFR and UGT2A1/2 may increase susceptibility of EOC in AA women. Future studies to validate these findings are warranted. Alterations in EGFR and UGT2A1/2 could perturb enzyme efficacy, proliferation in ovaries, impact and mark susceptibility to EOC.

Keywords: African ancestry risk, genetic association, ovarian cancer, vitamin D pathway

1. INTRODUCTION

Women of African ancestry (AA) have the lowest incidence of ovarian cancer worldwide, but they tend to present with more advanced tumors and have lower 5‐year survival (35%) compared to women of European descent (47%) in nearly every cancer subtype.1, 2 Compared to Caucasian women, there have been fewer published studies investigating the association between common risk factors, such as tubal ligation, use of hormonal contraceptives, obesity, body powder and dietary patterns, and ovarian cancer risk in AA.1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Moreover, the investigation of genetic susceptibility to epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in AA has not been comprehensive. The limited assessment of genetic susceptibility among AA is in modest sized study populations of candidate genes including the repeat polymorphisms of the androgen receptor (AR), vitamin D receptor (VDR) and cellular transport genes, where an association with risk of ovarian cancer was observed.10, 11, 12

The vitamin D receptor mediates the regulation of a pleotropic cascade of physiological responses; including those involved in phase I and phase II detoxification and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) proliferation pathways in ovarian and other cancer cell lines; through VDR/DNA interactions and bioavailability of vitamin D.13, 14, 15, 16, 17 A VDR variant, rs7305032, was associated with ovarian cancer in 125 cases and 155 controls of AA but other observations were limited because of small sample size.11 Moreover, known genetic variations in the VDR/vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway target genes have been implicated in AA disease risk. Therefore an objective of this study was to assess those variants in ovarian cancer in women of African ancestry in a large sample.

Using a candidate gene approach, SNPs were selected from genes involved in vitamin D biosynthesis and metabolism; and putative targets of VDR regulation. Genes of the vitamin D biosynthesis pathways included cytochrome P450s:CYP2R1, CYP27B1, CYP24A1, CYP11A1, and group‐specific component‐vitamin D‐binding protein (GC) which collectively are responsible for the homeostatic control and bioavailability of vitamin D.18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 The candidate genes involved in vitamin D metabolic processes included CYP3A4/5 and UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A (UGT1A) locus members. They are responsible for glucuronidation and hydroxylation of the biologically active and circulatory forms of vitamin D. These genes are also inclusive of candidates regulated by vitamin D/VDR binding and included CYP3A4/5, UGT1A locus members, EGFR and UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 2 (UGT2) locus members; that are associated, in part, with other cancers in AA individuals.24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 Thus, variants in VDR and additional genes from vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway targets are viable candidates to investigate the genetic underpinnings of ovarian cancer risk in women of African descent.

In this study, SNPs from 11 gene regions: VDR, EGFR, UGT1A, UGT2A1/2, UGT2B, CYP3A4/5, CYP2R1, CYP27B1, CYP24A1, CYP11A1, and GC, were genotyped, imputed then assessed for risk of EOC and high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) in cases and controls of AA from the African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES)40 and the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC).41

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study populations

The Genetic Associations and Mechanisms in Oncology (GAME‐ON) project comprised 63, mostly, case‐control studies from four continents (North America, Europe, Asia and Australia). Only 32 studies contributed subjects of African Ancestry, including AACES and studies in OCAC, and were included in the current analysis (Supplemental Table S1). AACES, previously described elsewhere,40 is a multi‐center population‐based case‐control study of newly diagnosed invasive EOC in African American women that enrolled study subjects between 2010 and 2015. Established in 2005, OCAC is an international consortium focused on genetic association and pooled risk factor analyses. The current analyses included 1990 samples: 1235 controls and 755 invasive EOC cases who passed quality control filters, all of whom were AA. The majority of the EOC cases were HGSOC (n = 537, 71%), followed by 49 mucinous cases (7%), 28 endometrioid cases (4%), 23 clear cell cases (3%), 12 mixed histology (2%) and 53 other (7%). All subjects included in this analysis provided written informed consent as well as data and blood samples under ethically approved protocols.

2.2. Genotyping, ancestry analysis and quality control

Genotyping of AA women from OCAC was completed using the custom‐designed 533,631 SNP array, the Illumina OncoArray. Sample level quality control included restriction to females, filter on call rate >95%, heterozygosity (either too big or too small), removal of ineligible samples, and relationship inference to check for unexpected first degree relatives. SNP level quality control included filter on call rate >95%, and Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium p‐value >1 × 10−5. After applying these procedures, 471,780 SNPs remained.

Intercontinental ancestry was calculated for the OCAC and AACES samples using the software package FastPop42 that was developed specifically for the OncoArray Consortium. Only the African ancestry samples defined as having >50% AA were used for the present analyses reported here. Seventy‐seven cases and 120 controls were omitted due to African ancestry <50% and one gender mismatch. Principal components computed using FastPop were further used to adjust for population structure in our analyses.

2.3. Genotype imputation analysis

Using the genotyped SNPs that passed quality control, haplotypes were phased using SHAPEIT v2 followed by imputation to the 1,000 Genomes Phase 3 v5 reference set using Minimac3.

2.4. Gene region and SNP selection

Eleven gene regions were defined based on human genome build 37. SNPs within the selected regions were filtered on imputation quality score (minimac imputation R‐squared) >0.5 for imputed SNPs, or Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium p‐value >1.0 × 10−5 for genotyped SNPs. Quantile‐quantile plots on the EOC and HGSOC dataset (Manichaikul et al, unpublished) have lambdas of 1.01 each within normal range.43 The imputation quality scores for significant SNPs are provided. We further applied filters on effective heterozygosity count (HC) > 30. After applying filters, the following number of SNPs remaining in each of the selected gene regions for EOC was: 288 in VDR, 433 in UGT2A1/2, 6302 in UGT2B, 919 in UGT1A, 963 in EGFR, 17 in CYP2R1, 4 in CYP27B1, 113 in CYP24A1, 90 in CYP11A1, 411 in CYP3A4/5 and 296 in GC. For selected regions for HGSOC analysis, the number of SNPs was: 234 in VDR, 413 in UGT2A1/2, 5674 in UGT2B, 833 in UGT1A, 824 in EGFR, 15 in CYP2R1, 4 in CYP27B1, 106 in CYP24A1, 82 in CYP11A1, 375 in CYP3A4/5 and 282 in GC.

2.5. Statistical analysis

Genetic association testing was carried out with adjustment for two principal components (PCs) of ancestry using a logistic regression model that accounts for genotype uncertainty under a score test as implemented in SNPTEST v2.5.2 to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). For each gene region, we applied a gene‐specific Bonferroni‐threshold for statistical significance defined as 0.05/number of SNPs examined for that gene. We further assessed the main results with an alternative to the Bonferroni threshold using the Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) which provides the posterior probability of a false discovery based on a given prior probability of nonnull association at a given SNP.44 For this study we specified a prior probability of association at each SNP under investigation based on the total number of SNPs within each candidate gene region as 0.5 × 1/(NSNP/3) where NSNP represents the number of SNPs in the given candidate gene region. We considered NSNP/3 to be an approximation of the effective number of independent SNPs within in each gene region, taking into account the fact that many SNPs will be correlated due to linkage disequilibrium. Accordingly, the specified prior indicates a 50% chance of true discovery within each gene region, with the prior probability of nonnull association distributed randomly among all SNPs within the region. In order to avoid spurious positive associations, we applied a filter on effective (HC) > 30 in each of cases and controls. Here, HC is defined as N × MAF ×  (1‐MAF) for each SNP, N represents the sample size (either the number of cases or the number of controls), and MAF represents the SNP minor allele frequency. Based on 755 EOC cases and 537 HGSOC cases, respectively, applying this filter equates to applying a SNP MAF filter of 4.2% and 6% in analysis of EOC and HGSOC, respectively. Statistical power calculations for AA study participants and Caucasians are included in Supplemental Tables S2 and S3.

3. RESULTS

3.1. VDR pathway gene regions and risk of EOC

SNPs from 11 gene regions (CYP3A4/5,CYP2R1, CYP27B1, CYP24A1, CYP11A1, EGFR, GC, UGT1A, UGT2A1/2, UGT2B and VDR) from VDR biosynthesis and pathway targets were assessed for association with EOC (Supplemental Table S4). The top associations are reported in Table 1. Individuals carrying the major allele of SNP rs10017134 of the UGT2A1/2 gene region had an increased odds of EOC when corrected for multiple comparisons (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2‐1.7, P = 1.2 × 10−6). The BFDP for rs10017134 of 0.020 corresponds to 98% posterior probability of nonnull association for this SNP. Significant associations with EOC were also observed for UGT2A1/2 SNPs, rs2288741 and rs11939884. The variants are found in both UGT2A1 and UGT2A2 as the genes share common exons 2 through 6.45 Supplemental Table S5 summarizes other notable (P < 0.01) SNP associations with EOC in the OncoArray analysis.

Table 1.

Top SNP P‐values from gene regions associated with EOC in African American OncoArray analysis

SNP ID (Effect/other allele) Nearest gene(s) Effect Allele Frequency N OR 95% CI P‐value Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) Imputation quality
rs10017134 (C/T) UGT2A1/2a, b 0.73 1990 1.4 1.2‐1.7 1.2 × 10−6 0.020 0.998
rs2288741 (T/G) UGT2A1/2b 0.73 1990 1.4 1.2‐1.6 1.9 × 10−6
rs11939884 (T/G) UGT2A1/2a, b 0.14 1990 0.7 0.5‐0.8 1.7 × 10−6
a

Imputed.

b

Bonferroni correction was applied to adjust for multiple SNPs comparisons. There were 433 SNPs in UGT2A1/2 gene. BFDP is reported based on a prior probability of association (pi0) equal to 0.6 * 1/(Number of SNPs/3).

3.2. VDR pathway gene regions and risk of HGSOC

SNPs from the 10 gene regions from VDR biosynthesis and pathway targets were assessed for association with HGSOC (Supplemental Table S4). The top associations are in reported in Table 2. Individuals carrying the minor allele of EGFR SNP rs114972508 had more than twofold increased odds of HGSOC (OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.2‐3.4, P = 1.6 × 10−5) (Table 2). The posterior BFDP is 29% for SNP rs114972508 corresponds to 71% posterior probability of nonnull association. SNP rs10017134 of the UGT2A1/2 gene region also showed association with HGSOC (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2‐1.7, P = 2.3 × 10−5) (Table 2). The posterior BFDP is 22.8%. Supplemental Table S6 summarizes other notable (P < 0.01) SNP associations with HGSOC in the OncoArray analysis.

Table 2.

Top SNP P‐values from gene regions associated with HGSOC in African American OncoArray analysis

SNP ID (Effect/other allele) Nearest gene(s) Effect Allele Frequency N OR 95% CI P‐value Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) Imputation quality
rs114972508 (T/C) EGFRa, b 0.04 1772 2.3 1.2‐3.4 1.6 × 10−5 0.293 0.890
rs10017134 (C/T) UGT2A1/2a,b 0.72 1772 1.4 1.2‐1.7 2.3 × 10−5 0.228 0.998
rs2288741 (T/G) UGT2A1/2b 0.72 1772 1.4 1.2‐1.7 3.1 × 10−5
a

Imputed.

b

Bonferroni correction was applied to adjust for multiple SNPs comparisons. There were 824 SNPs in EGFR gene, and 413 SNPs in UGT2A1/2 gene. BFDP is reported based on a prior probability of association (pi0) equal to 0.5 * 1/(Number of SNPs/3).

4. DISCUSSION

Few studies have investigated the genetic susceptibility for ovarian cancer among women of African descent. The assessment of candidate SNPs from chromosomal regions that contain genes regulated by VDR activity provides some evidence of association with EOC risk. The notable findings from this analysis show, for the first time, that risk assessments of variants in the UGT2A1/2 and EGFR gene regions are suggestive of associations with EOC and HGSOC. The results also demonstrate evidence of associations for other SNPs from the candidate gene regions with EOC and HGSOC. Although the candidate SNPs are located in intronic regions there is ample evidence that many gene regulatory regions are present in those regions including encoded microRNAs, alternate splice sites, and cis‐regulatory modules and transcription factors binding sites.46, 47, 48 In addition, recent studies have shown using targeted RNAseq analysis that there are numerous splice variants of the UGT genes.49

The UGT2A1 and 2A2 genes are distinguished by unique first exons joined to common exons 2‐6 and are located downstream of UGT2B4 on chromosome 4.45 UGT2A transcripts have been detected in several extrahepatic tissues such as the lung, trachea, larynx, intestine, pancreas, and kidney.50 UGT2A1 is an extrahepatic enzyme that is expressed mainly in the nasal epithelium, catalyzing the glucuronidation of testosterone and epitestosterone at considerable rates and has similar kinetics as the UGT2B gene family members.51 There are reports that this enzyme also has activity toward estrogen metabolites epiestradiol and β‐estradiol.52 UGT2A1 has exhibited highest expression in the lung, followed by trachea, tonsil, larynx, colon, olfactory.53 UGT2A2 mRNA expression was reported in fetal and adult nasal mucosa tissues.54 However, unlike UGT2A1, other expression analyses suggested that wild‐type UGT2A2 had the highest expression in the breast, followed by trachea, larynx, and kidney.55

Neither the UGT2A1 gene, nor UGT2A2 expression have been examined in ovarian tissue. However, VDR ChIPseq peak locations have been identified 430 kb downstream of the UGT2A1/2 locus in experiments with THP‐1 cells treated with 1a,25(OH)2D3, the biologically active form of the vitamin D hormone, suggestive of a regulatory role for vitamin D.56 Splice variants found in UGT2A1/2 that are highly conserved among both UGT1A and UGT2 gene families have been implicated in altered glucuronidation activity against tobacco carcinogenesis.49, 53, 55, 57 Two of the UGT2A1 SNPs associated with EOC and HGSOC in this study are intron variants (rs10017134 and rs2288741) while the third (rs11939884) is a 3’ UTR variant. It is probable that these variants alter enzyme function in target tissues including ovarian and/or alter risk in AA smokers. Of note, cigarette smoking has been found to be associated with the risk of mucinous EOC, but not HGSOC among Caucasian women.58 Moreover, providing some plausibility for the mechanism of the observed SNP association, a recent report suggests that cigarette smoking may be associated with serous EOC among African American women although a dose‐response relationship was not observed.59 The association of genes from the UGT superfamily with ovarian cancer in AA is consistent with significant associations observed for Caucasian women for UGT1A.12 However in this study, no association was observed for AA samples with SNPs with a MAF of 0.42 for the risk allele while associations were observed in Caucasians with SNPs with a MAF of 0.07. Some but not all MAFs for the relationships observed in this study differ by race so it is unlikely to explain racial differences in risk.

The EGFR gene product has been a chemotherapeutic target for EOC since overexpression has been linked to poor prognosis in ovarian cancer patients.60, 61, 62 The signaling pathway for EGFR is mediated by ligands including the epidermal growth factor in the regulation of cell proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis in normal cells. Research into the mechanisms of EGFR overexpression has focused on mutations and amplifications in the coding region of the gene containing the receptor tyrosine kinase domain.63 However, few studies on SNP variants in this region have been linked to EOC or other ovarian cancer histologic subtypes.61, 63 EGFR SNP rs114972508 is located in intron 1 of the EGFR gene. The location of the SNP is approximately 70 kb upstream of a VDR binding site also within EGFR intron 1 that has been shown experimentally to down regulate EGFR expression and proliferative function.15 Perhaps changes in the intron sequences may impact EGFR function and subsequently be as critical to cellular homeostasis as the receptor tyrosine function that has been extensively researched. Thus, EGFR SNPs could be abrogating vitamin D hormone regulation of ovarian cell proliferation and increasing susceptibility for the development of HGSOC in AA women.

Although we were unable to confirm the association between previously identified VDR variants and risk of EOC, a recent case‐control study of women of European ancestry (10,065 cases, 21,654 controls) showed that SNPs associated with decreased circulating 25‐hydroxyvitamin D were associated with ovarian cancer and HGSOC64 while another study showed that AA women exposed to increased sunlight had a decreased risk for ovarian cancer.8 These observations suggest that other mechanisms affecting vitamin D hormone activity independent of the VDR may be important in ovarian cancer etiology.

The main observations in the current study result from associations of imputations of genotyped SNPs but independent of VDR variant association with EOC and HGSOC. The VDR SNPs previously observed to be associated with the risk of EOC,11 including rs7975232 and rs7305032, were not associated with risk of EOC in the current study (Supplemental Table S7). A look up of the significant study SNPs in archived OCAC data on Caucacians shows no significant associations for the UGT2A1/2 SNPs. Data on the EGFR SNP were not available (Supplemental Table S8). Other VDR SNPs showed nominal (nonBonferroni corrected) associations with EOC but not with HGSOC (Supplemental Table S7). Although the largest study to date of genetic association with EOC in AA, the modest sample size remains a limitation of the current study and therefore some of the nominal SNP associations may be a result of inadequate power. The analyses are underpowered for discovery analysis across the selected gene regions and important associations may have been missed, nonetheless, we still found significantly associations with EOC and HGSOC. Several suggestive and nominal SNP associations (outside of Bonferroni significance) may provide some insight and consideration for future experimental studies to further explore the relevance of vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway target genes. Larger studies of AA are warranted to clarify these finding.

In summary, this study reports, for the first time, an association between EGFR and UGT2A1/2 variants with ovarian cancer risk in AA women. These gene variants could perturb cell proliferation and enzyme efficacy in ovaries and impact susceptibility to ovarian cancer by altering growth and intercellular hormone metabolism. Future studies are needed to validate the associations of the imputed SNPs and to determine their impact on cancer development. Currently, there are no published reports of population studies of UGT2A1/2 polymorphisms in Europeans or other racially distinct groups in larger sample sizes than this AA study that would allow intricate gene‐environment analysis. At this present time, there is only limited evidence that UGT2B gene region variants may be associated with differences in nicotine metabolism across African American, Native Hawaiian, Caucasian, Latino, and Japanese American smokers.65, 66 Analyses of the UGT2A1/2 variants across populations may reveal differential risk to ovarian disease. In addition, expression and functional analysis in ovarian tissue needs to be accomplished to elucidate the impact on tissue homeostasis. In spite of the limitations of this study, these results provide new insight into proliferative and hormone target pathways that may represent important opportunities for the development of chemotherapeutic targets and intervention strategies.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Supporting information

 

 

 

 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The BEL study would like to thank Gilian Peuteman, Thomas Van Brussel, Annick Van den Broeck and Joke De Roover for technical assistance. The CAM study was supported by Cancer Research UK, the University of Cambridge, and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre. The MOF study would like to thank the Total Cancer Care™ Protocol and the Collaborative Data Services and Tissue Core Facilities at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, Merck Pharmaceuticals and the state of Florida (MOF). The NHS/NHSII studies thank 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, and WY. The SEA study thanks the SEARCH team, Craig Luccarini, Caroline Baynes, Don Conroy. The UKO study thanks I. Jacobs, M. Widschwendter, E. Wozniak, A. Ryan, J. Ford and N. Balogun for their contribution to the study. The WMH study thanks the Gynaecological Oncology Biobank at Westmead, a member of the Australasian Biospecimen Network‐Oncology group.

Grant DJ, Manichaikul A, Alberg AJ, et al. Evaluation of vitamin D biosynthesis and pathway target genes reveals UGT2A1/2 and EGFR polymorphisms associated with epithelial ovarian cancer in African American Women. Cancer Med. 2019;8:2503–2513. 10.1002/cam4.1996

Funding information

This work was supported by the National Institues of Health (Genetic Associations and Mechanisms in Oncology (GAME‐ON) (U19‐CA148112); R01‐CA114343 and R01‐CA114343‐S1 for the genotyping, bioinformatics, and biostatistical analysis for MAY, NCO, TBO, and TOR; P30‐CA15083 for the Mayo Clinic Genotyping Shared Resource; R01‐CA142081 for AACES; R01‐CA112523 and R01‐CA87538 for DOV; R01‐CA58598, N01‐CN‐55424 and N01‐PC‐67001 for HAW; K07‐CA080668, R01‐CA95023, P50‐CA159981 and MO1‐RR000056 for HOP; R01‐CA122443, P30‐CA15083, and P50‐CA136393 for MAY; CA54281, CA164973, and CA63464 for MEC; R01‐CA76016 for NCO; R01‐CA54419 and P50‐CA105009 for NEC; UM1‐CA186107, P01‐CA87969, R01‐CA49449, UM1‐CA176726, and R01‐CA67262 for NHS; R01CA160669‐01A1 for OVA; P50‐CA159981 and R01‐CA126841 for RPC; Z01‐ES044005 and Z01‐ES049033 for SIS and the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences for SIS; U01‐CA71966 and U01‐CA69417 for STA; R01‐CA058860 for UCI; P01‐CA17054, P30‐CA14089, R01‐CA61132, N01‐PC67010, R03‐CA113148, R03‐CA115195, and N01‐CN025403 for USC; the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute for PLC); Nationaal Kankerplan (BEL), a Vanderbilt CTSA grant from the National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (ULTR000445 for BVU); the National Institutes of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and Cancer Research UK (for RMH; C490/A10119 and C490/A10124 for SEA; and Cambridge Cancer Centre for CAM); the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (DKE); the Department of Defense (DAMD17‐02‐1‐0669 for HOP; DAMD17‐02‐1‐0666 for NCO; W81XWH‐10‐1‐02802 for NEC); the American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP‐06‐258‐01‐COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR000124) for LAX; the Mayo Foundation, the Minnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance and the Katherine B. Andersen Foundation (for MAY); the Moffitt Cancer Center (P30‐CA076292), Merck Pharmaceuticals, the state of Florida, Hillsborough County and the city of Tampa (for MOF); Helse Vest, the Norwegian Cancer Society, and the Research Council of Norway (for NOR); Radboud University Medical Centre (for NTH); the OHSU Foundation (for ORE); the Canadian Institiues of Health (MOP‐86727 for OVA); Royal Marsden Hospital (for RMH); the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge (SEA); the Lon V Smith Foundation (LVS‐39420 for UCI); Princess Margaret Cancer Centre Foundation‐Bridge for the Cure (for UHN); The Eve Appeal (The Oak Foundation) and the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre (for UKO); the California Cancer Research Program (00‐01389 V‐20170, 2II0200 for USC); the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (310670 and 628903 for WMH); Cancer Institute NSW (12/RIG/1‐17 and 15/RIG/1‐16 for WMH); Research Centers in Minority Institutes (RCMI), National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities; North Carolina Central University/University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, U54 Cooperative Agreement Grant, National Cancer Institute (1U54MD012393‐02 DJG; 1U54CA156735‐01 for DJG, TOK, CH, JMS)

REFERENCES

  • 1. Chornokur G, Amankwah EK, Schildkraut JM, Phelan CM. Global ovarian cancer health disparities. Gynecol. Oncol. 2013;129:258‐264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE, et al. Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:284‐296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Moorman PG, Palmieri RT, Akushevich L, Berchuck A, Schildkraut JM. Ovarian cancer risk factors in African‐American and white women. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170:598‐606. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Schildkraut JM, Calvocoressi L, Wang F, et al. Endogenous and exogenous hormone exposure and the risk of meningioma in men. J Neurosurg. 2014;120:820‐826. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Schildkraut JM, Abbott SE, Alberg AJ, et al. Association between body powder use and ovarian cancer: the African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25:1411‐1417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Bandera EV, Qin B, Moorman PG, et al. Obesity, weight gain, and ovarian cancer risk in African American women. Int J Cancer. 2016;139:593‐600. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Erondu CO, Alberg AJ, Bandera EV, et al. The Association between body mass index and presenting symptoms in African American women with ovarian cancer. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2016;25:571‐578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Qin B, Moorman PG, Alberg AJ, et al. Dairy, calcium, vitamin D and ovarian cancer risk in African‐American women. Br J Cancer. 2016;115:1122‐1130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Peres LC, Bandera EV, Qin B, et al. Dietary inflammatory index and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in African American women. Int J Cancer. 2017;140:535‐543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Schildkraut JM, Murphy SK, Palmieri RT, et al. Trinucleotide repeat polymorphisms in the androgen receptor gene and risk of ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:473‐480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Grant DJ, Hoyo C, Akushevich L, et al. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) polymorphisms and risk of ovarian cancer in Caucasian and African American women. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;129:173‐178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Chornokur G, Lin HY, Tyrer JP, et al. Common genetic variation in cellular transport genes and epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0128106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Kasai N, Sakaki T, Shinkyo R, et al. Metabolism of 26,26,26,27,27,27‐F6‐1 alpha,23S,25‐trihydroxyvitamin D3 by human UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A3. Drug Metab Dispos. 2005;33:102‐107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Kaeding J, Belanger J, Caron P, Verreault M, Belanger A, Barbier O. Calcitrol (1alpha,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D3) inhibits androgen glucuronidation in prostate cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008;7:380‐390. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Shen Z, Zhang X, Tang J, et al. The coupling of epidermal growth factor receptor down regulation by 1alpha,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D3 to the hormone‐induced cell cycle arrest at the G1‐S checkpoint in ovarian cancer cells. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2011;338:58‐67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Nylen H, Bjorkhem‐Bergman L, Ekstrom L, et al. Plasma levels of 25‐hydroxyvitamin D3 and in vivo markers of cytochrome P450 3A activity in Swedes and Koreans: effects of a genetic polymorphism and oral contraceptives. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2014;115:366‐371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Huang M, Wang HM, Guo Y, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphism of CYP3A4 intron 2 and its influence on CYP3A4 mRNA expression and liver enzymatic activity in human liver. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2015;35:502‐507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Carpenter TO. CYP24A1 loss of function: clinical phenotype of monoallelic and biallelic mutations. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2017;173:337‐340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Thacher TD, Levine MA. CYP2R1 mutations causing vitamin D‐deficiency rickets. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2017;173:333‐336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Rezaie Z, Taheri M, Kohan L, Sayad A. Down‐regulation of CYP27B1 gene expression in Iranian patients with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis. Hum Antibodies. 2016;24:71‐76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Mateos‐Munoz B, Garcia‐Martin E, Torrejon MJ, et al. GC gene polymorphism and unbound serum retinol‐binding protein 4 are related to the risk of insulin resistance in patients with chronic hepatitis C: a prospective cross‐sectional study. Medicine. 2016;95:e3019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Miller WL. Genetic disorders of Vitamin D biosynthesis and degradation. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2017;165:101‐108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Pike JW, Meyer MB, Benkusky NA, et al. Genomic Determinants of Vitamin D‐Regulated Gene Expression. Vitam Horm. 2016;100:21‐44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Cheng CY, Slominski AT, Tuckey RC. Hydroxylation of 20‐hydroxyvitamin D3 by human CYP3A4. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2016;159:131‐141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Morales E, Sanchez‐Solis M, Garcia‐Marcos L. Vitamin D metabolism genes in asthma and atopy. Mini Rev Med Chem. 2015;15:913‐926. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Mondul AM, Shui IM, Yu K, et al. Vitamin D‐associated genetic variation and risk of breast cancer in the breast and prostate cancer cohort consortium (BPC3). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:627‐630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Wang Z, Wong T, Hashizume T, et al. Human UGT1A4 and UGT1A3 conjugate 25‐hydroxyvitamin D3: metabolite structure, kinetics, inducibility, and interindividual variability. Endocrinology. 2014;155:2052‐2063. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Shike M, Doane AS, Russo L, et al. The effects of soy supplementation on gene expression in breast cancer: a randomized placebo‐controlled study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju189. 10.1093/jnci/dju189 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Maguire O, Pollock C, Martin P, et al. Regulation of CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 expression and modulation of "intracrine" metabolism of androgens in prostate cells by liganded vitamin D receptor. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2012;364:54‐64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Barnholtz‐Sloan JS, Raska P, Rebbeck TR, Millikan RC. Replication of GWAS "Hits" by race for breast and prostate cancers in European Americans and African Americans. Front Genet. 2011;2:37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Khan AA, Dragt BS, Porte RJ, Groothuis GM. Regulation of VDR expression in rat and human intestine and liver–consequences for CYP3A expression. Toxicol In Vitro. 2010;24:822‐829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Hashizume T, Xu Y, Mohutsky MA, et al. Identification of human UDP‐glucuronosyltransferases catalyzing hepatic 1alpha,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D3 conjugation. Biochem Pharmacol. 2008;75:1240‐1250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Matsubara T, Yoshinari K, Aoyama K, et al. Role of vitamin D receptor in the lithocholic acid‐mediated CYP3A induction in vitro and in vivo. Drug Metab Dispos. 2008;36:2058‐2063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. McCullough ML, Bostick RM, Mayo TL. Vitamin D gene pathway polymorphisms and risk of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer. Annu Rev Nutr. 2009;29:111‐132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Zeigler‐Johnson CM, Walker AH, Mancke B, et al. Ethnic differences in the frequency of prostate cancer susceptibility alleles at SRD5A2 and CYP3A4. Hum Hered. 2002;54:13‐21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Shuch B, Mikhail M, Satagopan J, et al. Racial disparity of epidermal growth factor receptor expression in prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4725‐4729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Guillemette C, Millikan RC, Newman B, Housman DE. Genetic polymorphisms in uridine diphospho‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 and association with breast cancer among African Americans. Can Res. 2000;60:950‐956. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Paris PL, Kupelian PA, Hall JM, et al. Association between a CYP3A4 genetic variant and clinical presentation in African‐American prostate cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8:901‐905. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Grant DJ, Hoyo C, Oliver SD, et al. Association of uridine diphosphate‐glucuronosyltransferase 2B gene variants with serum glucuronide levels and prostate cancer risk. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2013;17:3‐9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Schildkraut JM, Iversen ES, Akushevich L, et al. Molecular signatures of epithelial ovarian cancer: analysis of associations with tumor characteristics and epidemiologic risk factors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22:1709‐1721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Berchuck A, Schildkraut JM, Pearce CL, Chenevix‐Trench G, Pharoah PD. Role of genetic polymorphisms in ovarian cancer susceptibility: development of an international ovarian cancer association consortium. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2008;622:53‐67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Li Y, Byun J, Cai G, et al. FastPop: a rapid principal component derived method to infer intercontinental ancestry using genetic data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2016;17:122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Lin P, Hartz SM, Zhang Z, et al. A new statistic to evaluate imputation reliability. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e9697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Wakefield J. A Bayesian measure of the probability of false discovery in genetic epidemiology studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2007;81:208‐227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Mackenzie PI, Bock KW, Burchell B, et al. Nomenclature update for the mammalian UDP glycosyltransferase (UGT) gene superfamily. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2005;15:677‐685. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Steiman‐Shimony A, Shtrikman O, Margalit H. Assessing the functional association of intronic miRNAs with their host genes. RNA. 2018;24:991‐1004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Martinez‐Montiel N, Rosas‐Murrieta NH, Anaya Ruiz M, Monjaraz‐Guzman E, Martinez‐Contreras R. Alternative splicing as a target for cancer treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:632 10.3390/ijms19020632 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Ho M, Quintero‐Cadena P, Sternberg PW. Genome‐wide discovery of active regulatory elements and transcription factor footprints in Caenorhabditis elegans using DNase‐seq. Genome Res. 2017;27:2108‐2119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Tourancheau A, Margaillan G, Rouleau M, et al. Unravelling the transcriptomic landscape of the major phase II UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase drug metabolizing pathway using targeted RNA sequencing. Pharmacogenomics J. 2016;16:60‐70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Perreault M, Gauthier‐Landry L, Trottier J, et al. The Human UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase UGT2A1 and UGT2A2 enzymes are highly active in bile acid glucuronidation. Drug Metab Dispos. 2013;41:1616‐1620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Sten T, Bichlmaier I, Kuuranne T, Leinonen A, Yli‐Kauhaluoma J, Finel M. UDP‐glucuronosyltransferases (UGTs) 2B7 and UGT2B17 display converse specificity in testosterone and epitestosterone glucuronidation, whereas UGT2A1 conjugates both androgens similarly. Drug Metab Dispos. 2009;37:417‐423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Itaaho K, Mackenzie PI, Ikushiro S, Miners JO, Finel M. The configuration of the 17‐hydroxy group variably influences the glucuronidation of beta‐estradiol and epiestradiol by human UDP‐glucuronosyltransferases. Drug Metab Dispos. 2008;36:2307‐2315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Bushey RT, Chen G, Blevins‐Primeau AS, Krzeminski J, Amin S, Lazarus P. Characterization of UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 2A1 (UGT2A1) variants and their potential role in tobacco carcinogenesis. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2011;21:55‐65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Sneitz N, Court MH, Zhang X, et al. Human UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase UGT2A2: cDNA construction, expression, and functional characterization in comparison with UGT2A1 and UGT2A3. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2009;19:923‐934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Bushey RT, Dluzen DF, Lazarus P. Importance of UDP‐glucuronosyltransferases 2A2 and 2A3 in tobacco carcinogen metabolism. Drug Metab Dispos. 2013;41:170‐179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Heikkinen S, Vaisanen S, Pehkonen P, Seuter S, Benes V, Carlberg C. Nuclear hormone 1alpha,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D3 elicits a genome‐wide shift in the locations of VDR chromatin occupancy. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:9181‐9193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Bushey RT, Lazarus P. Identification and functional characterization of a novel UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 2A1 splice variant: potential importance in tobacco‐related cancer susceptibility. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2012;343:712‐724. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Faber MT, Kjær SK, Dehlendorff C, et al. Cigarette smoking and risk of ovarian cancer: a pooled analysis of 21 case–control studies. Cancer Causes Control. 2013;24:989‐1004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Kelemen LE, Abbott S, Qin B, et al. Cigarette smoking and the association with serous ovarian cancer in African American women: African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES). Cancer Causes Control. 2017; 28:699‐708. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Sheng Q, Liu J. The therapeutic potential of targeting the EGFR family in epithelial ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1241‐1245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Gui T, Shen K. The epidermal growth factor receptor as a therapeutic target in epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 2012;36:490‐496. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Reyes HD, Thiel KW, Carlson MJ, et al. Comprehensive profiling of EGFR/HER receptors for personalized treatment of gynecologic cancers. Mol Diagn Ther. 2014;18:137‐151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Showeil R, Romano C, Valganon M, et al. The status of epidermal growth factor receptor in borderline ovarian tumours. Oncotarget. 2016;7:10568‐10577. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Ong JS, Cuellar‐Partida G, Lu Y, et al. Association of vitamin D levels and risk of ovarian cancer: a Mendelian randomization study. Int J Epidemiol. 2016;45:1619–1630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Murphy SE, Park SS, Thompson EF, et al. Nicotine N‐glucuronidation relative to N‐oxidation and C‐oxidation and UGT2B10 genotype in five ethnic/racial groups. Carcinogenesis. 2014;35:2526–2533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Patel YM, Stram DO, Wilkens LR, et al. The contribution of common genetic variation to nicotine and cotinine glucuronidation in multiple ethnic/racial populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:119–127. [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

 

 

 

 

 


Articles from Cancer Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES