Abstract
Background:
High numbers of lymphocytes in tumor tissue, including T regulatory cells (Treg), have been associated with better colorectal cancer (CRC) survival. Tregs, a subset of CD4+ T lymphocytes, are mediators of immunosuppression in cancer and therefore variants in genes related to Treg differentiation and function could be associated with CRC prognosis.
Methods:
In a prospective German cohort of 3 593 CRC patients, we assessed the association of 771 SNPs in 58 T-reg related genes with overall and CRC-specific survival using Cox regression models. Effect modification by microsatellite instability (MSI) status was also investigated since tumors with MSI show greater lymphocytic infiltration and have been associated with better prognosis. Replication of significant results was attempted in 2 047 CRC patients of the International Survival Analysis in Colorectal cancer Consortium (ISACC).
Results:
A significant association of the TGFBR3 SNP rs7524066 with more favorable CRC-specific survival (hazard ratio (HR) per minor allele: 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74–0.94, p-value: 0.0033) was replicated in ISACC (HR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.98, p-value: 0.03). Suggestive evidence for association was found with two IL7 SNPs, rs16906568 and rs7845577. Thirteen SNPs with differential associations with overall survival according to MSI in the discovery analysis were not confirmed.
Conclusions:
Common genetic variation in the Treg pathway implicating genes such as TGFBR3 and IL7 was shown to be associated with prognosis of CRC patients.
Impact:
The implicated genes warrant further investigation.
Keywords: FoxP3, TGFBR3, TGFBR2, rs7524066, survival
INTRODUCTION
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the world 1. Implementation of population screening and the availability of new treatments have led to a decline in CRC-specific mortality and an increase in the 5-year survival 2–5. CRC prognosis is very heterogeneous and dependent on several factors. The main prognostic factors that have been identified include TNM stage, tumor grade, presence of metastases (especially in the liver), baseline alkaline phosphatase levels, baseline C-reactive protein and albumin levels (Glasgow prognostic score), as well as neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and pre-operative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels 6–10. In addition, the tumor microenvironment has been increasingly recognized to influence the prognosis of cancer including CRC 11. T regulatory cells (Tregs), a subset of CD4+ T-lymphocytes expressing the transcription factor FOXP3, are heterogeneous cell types, which play a central role in the maintenance of self-tolerance and immune homeostasis by suppressing the activation, proliferation, and function of numerous immune cells 12, 13. In tumor tissue, Tregs are able to suppress anti-tumor immune response and contribute to the development of an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. The presence of high numbers of Tregs has a negative prognostic effect on many cancer types such as breast cancer, melanoma or cervical cancer 14. In contrast, for CRC patients, the presence of a high number of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, including Tregs, in the tumor microenvironment has been associated with a more favorable survival 14–22. Tumors with microsatellite instability (MSI) are frequently characterized by inflammatory lymphocytic infiltration and tend to be associated with a better survival than non-MSI-high CRCs 23–25. This may, in part, be due to more effective immune responses involving Tregs 26, 27.
Genetic variation in inflammatory genes could play a role in the survival of patients after CRC diagnosis 28. To gain further insight into the biological mechanisms underlying Treg pathway and survival after CRC, we investigated common, inherited single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) affecting genes involved in the regulation of Treg functions.
No studies have so far investigated a possible influence of genetic variants in Treg-related genes on the prognosis of CRC patients. Therefore, our aim was to investigate the association between 771 germline variants in 58 Treg-related genes and the overall disease-specific survival of CRC patients, and to assess possible effect modification by MSI status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study sample consisted of CRC patients recruited into the ongoing population-based case-control study DACHS (Darmkrebs: Chancen der Verhütung durch Screening) conducted in the Rhine-Neckar Odenwald region in southwestern Germany 29, 30. Cases diagnosed between January 2003 and December 2013 were included if they were older than 30 years of age (with no upper limit), were able to communicate in German, were able to participate in a personal interview of around one hour and were a resident of the Rhine-Neckar Odenwald region. Only histologically confirmed cases who were diagnosed with their first primary CRC (ICD-10:C18-C20) were included. All patients gave their written informed consent. The study was approved by the relevant ethical committees of the University of Heidelberg and the State Medical Boards of Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany and was conducted in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki.
At baseline, trained interviewers collected information on the patient’s demographics, anthropometric indices, medical history including reproductive history, and lifestyle factors. A blood sample was requested at baseline and for a minority of patients who refused to provide blood, a mouthwash sample was collected instead (0.9% of participants). After five years of follow-up, information on treatment and disease course was collected from the treating physician. Vital status was collected from the population registries and cause of death was verified by death certificates from health authorities.
GENOTYPE DATA
The Flexigene kit was used to extract DNA from EDTA blood and mouthwash samples of the DACHS patients and quantification of the DNA was performed using Q6 Quanti-iT picoGreen dsDNA reagent and kit (Invitrogen/Life technologies, Darmstadt, Germany).
Genotyping was performed in collaboration with the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO); details have been previously described 31. DACHS samples were genotyped using the whole-genome Illumina CytoSNP assay (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) for patients recruited 2003–2006, the Illumina HumanOmniExpress BeadChip Kit for patients recruited 2007–2010 and the Illumina HumanOmniExpress BeadChip kit or the Illumina Infinium OncoArray-500K BeadChip for those recruited 2011–2013. For quality control, genotyped variants were excluded based on call rate (< 98%), lack of Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium in controls (HWE, P < 1 × 10− 4), and low minor allele frequency (MAF < 0.05) as described elsewhere 31–34. Samples were imputed using as reference panel the cosmopolitan haplotypes from Phase 1 of the 1,000 Genome Project (for patients recruited between 2003 and 2010) or the Haplotype Reference Consortium (for patients between 2011 and 2013) 35 using the University of Michigan Imputation Server 36. Before imputation, Shapeit2 was used to phase the GWAS data 37.
SNP SELECTION
Through extensive literature research, the most important genes in the Treg pathway were selected. Tagging SNPs were selected to represent genetic variation across the genes. SNPs in these genes as well as SNPs in the flanking regions (e.g. +/− 10 kb) were considered, after which Haploview 4.2 (Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA) was used for the selection of tagging SNPs, with a pairwise tagging approach based on reference data from the HapMap project (Utah resident with Northern and Western Europe ancestry (CEU population), Phase II/Release 24. In total, 771 SNPs in 58 genes were selected for this analysis (see Supplementary Table 1).
MSI DATA
Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples were used to determine MSI status. FFPE samples were collected from the different pathology departments at the cooperating hospitals and were stored at the tissue bank at the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) in Heidelberg. The area with the highest tumor cell concentration was identified microscopically and this section was then isolated using the DNeasy kit from Qiagen. A mononucleotide marker panel including BAT25, BAT26, and CAT25 was used to determine MSI status. Tumors showing amplifications in two or more markers were classified as MSI-high 38. These markers have a sensitivity of 98.2% and a specificity of 100% to differentiate MSI-high from non–MSI-high tumors 38, 39.
DATA ANALYSIS
Cox regression models were used to test the individual SNP associations with overall survival and CRC-specific survival. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each SNP. Survival time was calculated from date of diagnosis until date of death by any cause, death by CRC or date of last contact. Median follow-up time was calculated using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method 40. Age, sex, and TNM stage were included in the model as relevant prognostic factors. Additional covariates were determined using backward elimination of a set of variables including grade (1, 2 vs 3, 4), family history of CRC in first degree relatives (no vs. yes), smoking, body mass index (18.5–25, 25–30, 30+ kg/m2), alcohol intake (0 and quartiles in subjects with alcohol intake >0g/day), and physical activity (0 and quartiles). The variables body mass index (at diagnosis) and alcohol intake were retained in the final model as they were significantly associated with overall survival. Heterogeneity in the associations of the Treg gene polymorphisms with overall survival according to MSI status was assessed statistically using interaction terms between MSI status (high, non-high) and the polymorphisms and was evaluated using the likelihood ratio test. The SNP association according to MSI status was also estimated in subgroup analysis. The proportional hazards assumption was tested according to Grambsch and Therneau 41. The statistical analysis was carried out using SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) and R version 3.1.0 (www.r-project.org).
REPLICATION SET
For SNPs that showed a significant association with survival or an interaction with MSI (p-value ˂ 0.01), replication was performed using studies participating in the International Survival Analysis in Colorectal cancer Consortium (ISACC), a consortium aimed at investigating demographic, environmental, and genetic risk factors in association with CRC survival 42. For replication of the SNP associations with overall survival and CRC-specific survival, 1821 CRC patients from six studies were included: Diet And Lifestyle Study (DALS), Health Professionals Follow-up study (HPFS), Nurses` Health Study (NHS), Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR), Cancer Prevention Study II (CPS II), and the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS). All studies were genotyped on Illumina GWAS platforms and imputed to the Haplotype Reference Consortium (HRC) panel using the University of Michigan Imputation Server 35. Prior to imputation, Shapeit2 was used to phase the GWAS data 37. Details of genotyping and QC for studies included in the validation are described elsewhere43,32–34. Patients included in ISACC studies are of European ancestry.
For replication of results on effect modification according to MSI status, 1 554 CRC patients from five studies (DALS, HPFS, NHS, CPS II, MCCS) with available data on MSI were included. For DALS MSI status was determined using 12 markers, a panel of ten tetranucleotide repeats and the two mononucleotide repeats (BAT-26 and TGFBR2) 44. For HPFS and NHS, MSI status was assessed based on the same ten tetranucleotide repeats 45. For MCCS, MSI status was determined using a 10-loci panel in tumor DNA and matched normal tissue DNA (BAT25, BAT26, BAT40, MYCL, D5S346, D17S250, ACTC, D18S55, D10S197 and BAT34C4)46. For CPS II, determination of MSI status was based on the Bethesda Consensus Panel47. Classification was based on ≥5 interpretable markers (unless all four markers were unstable, in which case the tumor was classified as MSI-high). For these studies, MSI-high tumors were defined when ≥30% of the markers showed instability.
Analyses were performed by pooling the samples from all studies and adjusting for study. We used the same statistical methods as for the discovery phase. To account for the overrepresentation of patients with a positive family history of CRC in the DALS Minnesota samples, we included family history as an additional covariate in the MSI interaction analysis given the correlation between positive family history and MSI-high tumors. Missing data on environmental factors was imputed using single imputation.
FUNCTIONAL ANNOTATION
To add functional information to significant variants, we used the National Cancer Institute’s ‘LDlink’ web tool (https://ldlink.nci.nih.gov) to find all variants in linkage disequilibrium (LD; R2 ≥ 0.4 in Phase 3 1000 Genomes ‘EUR’ population) with the significant variant. Subsequently, we used the Variant Effect Predictor (VEP) tool of the Ensembl webpage (https://uswest.ensembl.org/info/docs/tools/vep/index.html) to show annotations 48.
DATA AVAILABILITY
Genotyping data of the GECCO studies are available at the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) for download at the accession number: phs001078.v1.p1.
RESULTS
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the DACHS study participants. The majority of patients were aged between 60–80 years at diagnosis with a median of 69 years and 60.5% were male. Over 60% of the patients were diagnosed with TNM stage II or III disease and 60.2% had a tumor in the colon. The median follow-up time was 63.0 months and, in total, 1 100 patients died during study follow-up. See the flow diagram in Figure 1 for inclusion of patients in the discovery stage. In the DACHS study, 10.7% of patients with data on MSI status were MSI-high and 89.3% were non-MSI-high.
Table 1).
Basic characteristics for 3593 CRC DACHS patients with complete follow-up information and for 1965 CRC patients according to MSI status
| All | MSI-high | Non-MSI-high | |
|---|---|---|---|
| N (number of events) | 3593 (1100) | 211 (50) | 1754 (590) |
| n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | |
| Sex | |||
| Female | 1420 (39.5) | 110 (52.1) | 712 (40.6) |
| Male | 2173 (60.5) | 101 (47.9) | 1042 (59.4) |
| Age | |||
| <60 years | 744 (20.7) | 36 (17.1) | 333 (19.0) |
| 60-<70 years | 1123 (31.3) | 59 (28.0) | 661 (31.4) |
| 70-<80 years | 1189 (33.1) | 61 (28.9) | 607 (34.6) |
| ≥80 years | 537 (14.9) | 55 (26.1) | 263 (15.0) |
| Median (Interquartile range) | 69 (61–76) | 71 (64–80) | 69 (62–76) |
| TNM Stage | |||
| 1 | 820 (22.8) | 30 (14.2) | 325 (18.7) |
| 2 | 1088 (30.3) | 113 (53.6) | 554 (31.6) |
| 3 | 1188 (32.9) | 62 (28.4) | 612 (34.9) |
| 4 | 502 (14.0) | 6 (2.8) | 260 (14.8) |
| Site | |||
| Colon | 2164 (60.2) | 200 (94.8) | 1036 (59.1) |
| Rectum | 1429 (39.8) | 11 (5.2) | 718 (40.9) |
| CRC-specific death | |||
| No | 2811 (78.2) | 191 (90.5) | 1334 (76.1) |
| Yes | 718 (20.0) | 19 (9.0) | 404 (23.0) |
| Missing | 64 (1.8) | 1 (0.5) | 16 (0.9) |
| Recurrence | |||
| No | 2576 (71.7) | 185 (87.7) | 1206 (68.8) |
| Yes | 983 (27.4) | 25 (11.8) | 542 (30.9) |
| Missing | 34 (0.9) | 1 (0.5) | 6 (0.3) |
| BMI category | |||
| Normal weight | 1390 (38.7) | 65 (30.8) | 704 (40.1) |
| Overweight | 1527 (42.5) | 91 (43.1) | 728 (41.5) |
| Obese | 676 (18.8) | 55 (26.1) | 322 (18.4) |
| Current alcohol intake (g/day) | |||
| no alcohol | 1093 (30.4) | 74 (35.1) | 524 (29.9) |
| 0.1–6.1 | 705 (19.6) | 52 (124.6) | 331 (18.9) |
| 6.1–15.6 | 624 (17.4) | 34 (16.1) | 303 (17.3) |
| 15.6–32.6 | 607 (16.9) | 31 (14.7) | 306 (17.4) |
| >= 32.6 | 564 (15.7) | 20 (9.5) | 290 (16.5) |
| Family history of CRC | |||
| No | 3086 (85.9) | 174 (82.5) | 1505 (85.8) |
| Yes | 507 (14.1) | 37 (17.5) | 249 (14.2) |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CRC, colorectal cancer; MSI, microsatellite instabilitiy
Figure 1.
Flow diagram on patient’s participation in the discovery stage
Three SNPs showed an association with overall survival (nominal p-value < 0.01) in the single SNP analysis (Table 2; see supplementary table 2 for results of all SNPs). The minor alleles of two genetic variants were associated with an increased risk of dying, rs2290065 (CCR7) with a HR of 1.31 per allele (95% CI: 1.07–1.61) and rs10815237 (CD274) with a HR of 1.13 per minor allele (95% CI 1.04–1.23). The minor allele of rs2421826 (CD44) was associated with lower overall survival (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.97).
Table 2).
SNPs in Treg related genes showing associations with overall survival in 3593 CRC DACHS patients at nominal p-value <0.01 and replication in independent 2047 CRC patients
| DACHS | ISACC | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNP | Gene | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value |
| Overall survival | |||||
| rs10815237 | CD274 | 1.13 (1.04– 1.23) | 0.0064 | 1.06 (0.94–1.19) | 0.38 |
| rs2421826 | CD44 | 0.89 (0.82– 0.97) | 0.0090 | 0.98 (0.87–1.10) | 0.71 |
| rs2290065 | CCR7 | 1.31 (1.07– 1.61) | 0.0095 | 0.92 (0.72–1.19) | 0.87 |
| CRC-specific survival | |||||
| rs10815237 | CD274 | 1.19 (1.07– 1.32) | 0.0018 | 1.14 (0.97–1.35) | 0.16 |
| rs7524066 | TGFBR3 | 0.83 (0.74– 0.94) | 0.0033 | 0.82 (0.68–0.98) | 0.03 |
| rs17571088 | TGFBR3 | 0.82 (0.71– 0.94) | 0.0050 | 0.95 (0.78–1.17) | 0.65 |
| rs1495578 | TGFBR2 | 1.17 (1.05– 1.30) | 0.0046 | 1.09 (0.94–1.27) | 0.25 |
| rs17623772 | TGFBR2 | 1.16 (1.04– 1.29) | 0.0081 | 1.07 (0.91–1.25) | 0.41 |
| rs4252328 | TGFB3 | 0.84 (0.73– 0.95) | 0.0070 | 1.06 (0.90–1.27) | 0.48 |
| rs16906568 | IL7 | 1.18 (1.05– 1.33) | 0.0050 | 1.20 (1.00–1.43) | 0.05 |
| rs7845577 | IL7 | 1.22 (1.05– 1.42) | 0.0084 | 1.23 (0.98–1.55) | 0.07 |
| rs2421826 | CD44 | 0.87 (0.78– 0.97) | 0.0098 | 0.92 (0.79–1.08) | 0.31 |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence intervall; CRC, colorectal cancer; DACHS, Darmkrebs: Chancen der Verhütung durch Screening; ISACC, International Survival Analysis in Colorectal cancer Consortium; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism.Hazards ratios, confidence intervals and p-values estimated from Cox Proportional Hazards regression analysisModels were adjusted by age, sex, and TNM stage, BMI at diagnosis, current alcohol intake
For CRC-specific survival, nine SNPs were associated at p-value<0.01. Here, the minor alleles of two SNPs in each of the genes IL7 (rs7845577 and rs16906568; LD r2=0.35) and TGFBR2 (rs1495578 and rs17623772; LD r2=0.8) as well as rs10815237 in gene CD274 were associated with poorer CRC-specific survival. The latter SNP rs10815237 was also associated with overall survival. The minor alleles of the other four SNPs, two in TGFBR3 (rs7524066 and rs17571088; LD r2=0.36), and one each in TGFB3 (rs4252328) and CD44 (rs2421826) were associated with better CRC-specific survival (Table 2, see supplementary Table 3 for all SNPs).
DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATIONS BY MSI STATUS
The results of the effect modifications by MSI status (211 MSI-high tumors, 1754 non-MSI-high) are shown for all SNPs in Supplementary Table 4. In the replication sample (ISAAC) 18.3% of samples were MSI-high and 81.7% non-MSI-high. Thirteen SNPs showed statistically significant interaction (nominal p-value <0.01) with MSI status (Table 3). Three of the SNPs lie in gene CD4 (rs7957426, rs10774451, rs10849524), the minor alleles of two of which were associated with decreased survival in MSI-high tumors (rs7957426, rs10774451) and of one SNP rs10849524 was associated with increased survival in MSI-high tumors. These SNPs were not associated with survival in non-MSI-high tumors. Five of the SNPs that showed significant heterogeneity were annotated to gene HLA-DRA, of which the minor alleles of four SNPs were also associated with decreased survival (rs3129848, rs17496549, rs3135392, rs9268644) in MSI high tumors. None of these five SNPs were associated with survival in non-MSI-high tumors. Two SNPs in IL15RA (rs2228059 and rs1998521) also showed associations with overall survival although in different directions for the minor alleles, and only in MSI high tumors but not in non-MSI-high tumors. The remaining SNPs, rs2069772 (IL2), rs11165376 (TGFBR3) and rs7135373 (IFNG), were also found associated with decreased survival solely in MSI high tumors.
Table 3).
SNPs in Treg related genes showing differential association with overall survival according to MSI status in 1965 CRC patients (at nominal p-value for interaction <0.01) and replication in independent 1307 CRC patients
| DACHS |
ISACC |
||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI-High (211 CRC patients) |
Non-MSI-high (1754 CRC patients) |
MSI-High (239 CRC patients) |
Non-MSI-high (1068 CRC patients) |
||||||||
| SNP | Gene | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value | p-value interaction | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value | Hazard Ratio per minor allele (95% CI) | p-value | p-value interaction |
| Overall mortality | |||||||||||
| rs7957426 | CD4 | 2.13 (1.39– 3.26) | 0.0005 | 1.00 (0.89– 1.13) | 0.9754 | 0.0035 | 1.28 (0.81–2.02) | 0.2888 | 0.94 (0.82–1.07) | 0.3493 | 0.3445 |
| rs3129848 | CD4 | 2.00 (1.28– 3.12) | 0.0024 | 0.97 (0.86– 1.09) | 0.5737 | 0.0045 | 1.58 (0.99–2.53) | 0.0573 | 0.92 (0.81–1.05) | 0.2209 | 0.3800 |
| rs10774451 | CD4 | 0.51 (0.32– 0.80) | 0.0031 | 1.02 (0.90– 1.14) | 0.7973 | 0.0052 | 1.59 (1.00–2.54) | 0.0501 | 0.91 (0.81–1.04) | 0.1711 | 0.3195 |
| rs17496549 | HLA-DRA | 2.09 (1.20– 3.64) | 0.0088 | 1.16 (0.97– 1.39) | 0.0995 | 0.0052 | 0.49 (0.25–0.96) | 0.0389 | 1.34 (1.11–1.62) | 0.0026 | 0.2190 |
| rs10849524 | HLA-DRA | 1.75 (1.10– 2.78) | 0.0179 | 0.97 (0.85– 1.10) | 0.6514 | 0.0041 | 0.50 (0.30–0.84) | 0.0080 | 1.15 (1.00–1.32) | 0.0513 | 0.3972 |
| rs3135392 | HLA-DRA | 1.50 (1.00– 2.26) | 0.0512 | 0.93 (0.82– 1.05) | 0.2387 | 0.0067 | 0.59 (0.37–0.94) | 0.0269 | 0.99 (0.87–1.14) | 0.9220 | 0.1468 |
| rs2069772 | HLA-DRA | 1.51 (0.99– 2.31) | 0.0554 | 0.96 (0.85– 1.07) | 0.4497 | 0.0097 | 2.30 (1.38–3.81) | 0.0013 | 0.82 (0.72–0.93) | 0.0027 | 0.8181 |
| rs6911419 | HLA-DRA | 0.72 (0.48– 1.09) | 0.1165 | 1.10 (0.98– 1.23) | 0.0939 | 0.0075 | 2.28 (1.38–3.75) | 0.0012 | 0.90 (0.79–1.03) | 0.1388 | 0.5347 |
| rs2228059 | IL15RA | 1.80 (1.15– 2.82) | 0.0107 | 0.92 (0.82– 1.03) | 0.1455 | 0.0075 | 0.98 (0.64–1.49) | 0.9113 | 0.96 (0.84–1.10) | 0.5549 | 0.8178 |
| rs1998521 | IL15RA | 0.60 (0.38– 0.94) | 0.0267 | 1.03 (0.92– 1.16) | 0.6011 | 0.0076 | 0.86 (0.55–1.34) | 0.5042 | 1.00 (0.87–1.14) | 0.9774 | 0.6695 |
| rs11165376 | TGFBR3 | 0.54 (0.31– 0.93) | 0.0275 | 0.98 (0.86– 1.12) | 0.8021 | 0.0082 | 1.13 (0.69–1.85) | 0.6343 | 0.92 (0.81–1.06) | 0.2581 | 0.5994 |
| rs7135373 | IFNG | 0.47 (0.27– 0.82) | 0.0079 | 0.99 (0.87– 1.12) | 0.8357 | 0.0089 | 1.07 (0.65–1.77) | 0.7889 | 0.92 (0.80–1.05) | 0.2149 | 0.7597 |
| rs9268644 | IL2 | 0.56 (0.33– 0.95) | 0.0326 | 0.98 (0.86– 1.11) | 0.7510 | 0.0075 | 1.51 (0.95–2.39) | 0.0830 | 0.95 (0.82–1.09) | 0.4507 | 0.6975 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CRC, colorectal cancer; MSI, microsatellite instability; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism.
Hazards ratios, confidence intervals and corresponding p-values estimated from Cox Proportional Hazards regression analysis
Interaction p-values calculated using likelihood ratio tests comparing the model with and without interaction term.
REPLICATION ANALYSIS
The characteristics of the participants from the ISACC studies included in the replication analysis are shown in Supplementary Table 5. None of the SNPs associated with overall survival in the DACHS discovery set showed significant association with overall survival in the ISACC replication sample (see Table 2). One of the nine associations with improved CRC-specific survival in DACHS, for rs7524066 (TGFBR3), was confirmed in the replication analysis, with a similar magnitude of association (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68–0.98). Two more SNPs (rs16906568 and rs7845577) in gene IL7, associated with poorer survival, were replicated with similar effect sizes and borderline significance (p-values of 0.05 and 0.07, respectively). Although not reaching statistical significance most SNPs showed the same direction of association in the replication sample except for rs4252328 (TGFB3). None of the SNPs that showed differential association by MSI status in DACHS were confirmed in ISACC.
FUNCTIONAL GENOMIC ANNOTATION
The SNP rs7524066 (TGFBR3), for which the association with disease-specific survival was replicated was further investigated to add functional information. We found 33 SNPs to be in LD with the investigated variant (R2 > 0.4) (Supplementary Table 6). We further assessed the function of these variants using the variant effect predictor (VEP) tool of the Ensembl webpage (Supplementary Table 7). We found that 15 of the LD SNPs are located in regulatory regions of the gene. Two of the SNPs are located in transcription factor binding sites (Supplementary Table 7).
DISCUSSION
We investigated the association of 771 Treg-related genetic variants with overall and CRC-specific survival in a large cohort of CRC patients and performed replication of top findings in an independent cohort of CRC patients from the ISACC consortium. While none of the SNPs associated with overall survival were confirmed in the independent dataset, one of nine SNPs associated with CRC-specific survival in the discovery dataset, rs7524066 (TGFBR3), was confirmed in the independent replication dataset. The minor allele was similarly associated with better CRC-specific survival in the discovery sample (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74–0.94) and the replication sample (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68–0.98).
Based on previous observations of differential T-cell infiltration of colorectal tumors according to MSI status 26, 49, 50, we also evaluated SNPs association with overall survival by MSI status. We found thirteen SNPs in six different genes that showed interactions with MSI in the discovery set (p<0.01) but were not able to replicate any of these interactions.
The SNP rs7524066, for which the association was replicated in the primary analysis of CRC-specific survival, is annotated to gene TGFBR3 (transforming growth factor β type III receptor), encoding one of the transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) receptors, which is also known as betaglycan 51. TGF-β is an important growth factor for normal development and homeostasis of all cells in the human body and can have both tumor suppressor as well as tumor promoting functions depending on context 52, 53. In contrast to the other two TGF-β receptors, TGFBR1 and TGFBR2, TGFBR3 does not have kinase activity 53. Still, it is not only a co-receptor but seems to act as a tumor suppressor for several cancer types 54,55. TGFBR3 appears to suppress WNT/CTNNB1 (β-catenin) signaling 56, which is linked to CRC development and progression. Our in silico functional analyses indicated that several SNPs in LD with rs7524066 lie in regulatory regions of the gene TGFBR3 and therefore might modify gene regulation. These mechanisms support the plausibility of TGFBR3 being associated with CRC-specific survival.
Furthermore, the association with worse CRC-specific survival of the minor allele of two SNPs (rs16906568 and rs7845577) related to gene IL7 (LD r2=between the SNPs =0.35) is of interest. IL7 is a cytokine which is important for B and T-cell development. Expression of IL7 was higher in CRC patients compared to controls and was associated with metastatic disease 57. Therefore, IL7 variants could have a role in survival after CRC diagnosis.
The CD274 variant rs10815237 was associated with both overall and CRC-specific survival and showed fairly similar magnitude of association particularly for CRC-specific survival in the replication sample albeit non-significant. Tumor CD274 (programmed cell death 1 ligand 1, PD-L1) expression has been associated inversely with Treg density in CRC 58. Tumor CD274 expression may modify prognostic association of aspirin 59. These data suggest that CD274 (PD-L1) may modify CRC behavior depending on other factors in the tumor immune microenvironment. It would be of interest to examine the interaction of the CD274 variant and Treg density (or aspirin use) in future prognostic studies.
One SNP (rs2421826) in the CD44 gene was also found associated with improved both overall as well as CRC-specific survival in the discovery analysis but was not statistically significantly associated in the replication set. CD44 is a multistructural and multifunctional cell surface adhesion molecule that is highly expressed in many cancers and involved in physiological processes. Through interaction with extracellular matrix ligands, it promotes the migration and invasion processes involved in metastases. Functionally active CD44 is associated with enhanced suppressor activity of Treg 60. Expression of stem-like factors including CD44 has been associated with metastatic disease and poorer prognosis in CRC 61 Two SNPs in gene TGFBR2 were associated with worse CRC-specific survival, but were not replicated. One of the roles of TGFBR2 is Treg suppression 62 and its inactivation has been associated with the development of CRC 63. These mechanisms make it plausible that genetic variants in TGFBR2 could be associated with CRC-specific survival.
We were not able to confirm any of the results stratified by MSI status, which could be partly due to the difference in the panels used for MSI characterization. The inability to confirm also many of the SNPs associated with overall- or CRC-specific survival in the discovery sample could be in part due to the limited power since the replication sample was smaller than the discovery sample. New association findings are generally biased upwards in discovery datasets so that larger study samples are required for replication. Measurement of Treg/FOXP3 cell expression within the tumour may improve future studies investigating Treg-related SNP associations with CRC survival.
Research into Tregs remains challenging as the definition of Tregs has changed over the past decade. The interplay with other T helper cells, expression of surface markers as well as expression of cytokines influencing functionality of T cell subtypes add to the complexity of this research field. Several studies have shown that different factors, including activated state of the immune cells, their location in the cellular matrix, ratio of different immune cells, can influence their involvement in tumor progression and subsequent CRC survival 21,64. Two distinct subpopulations of Treg cells were recently identified and shown to have differential impact on CRC prognosis 65. Genetic variation, which can be robustly measured, could help to provide further evidence for the prognostic impact of regulatory T cells on CRC prognosis.
This study is one of the first studies investigating genetic variations in the Treg pathway with respect to CRC survival. Replication was attempted in an independent sample of CRC patients. A large amount of genotype data was available, which enabled the comprehensive investigation of the Treg pathways. The quality control measures all showed that the genotype data was of high quality. There were no opportunities to perform functional analyses for the SNPs that were implicated through these analyses.
Although no strong associations were found, there is suggestive evidence based on these analyses particularly for the TGF beta receptors and the biological functions of the implicated genes to support further investigations of the aforementioned SNPs and genes with respect to CRC prognosis in large study samples.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements
DACHS: We thank all participants and cooperating clinicians, and Ute Handte-Daub, Utz Benscheid, Muhabbet Celik and Ursula Eilber for excellent technical assistance.
Harvard cohort (NHS): The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and those of participating registries as required. We would like to thank the participants and staff of the NHS 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.
CPS-II: The authors thank the CPS-II participants and Study Management Group for their invaluable contributions to this research. The authors would also like to acknowledge the contribution to this study from central cancer registries supported through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Program of Cancer Registries, and cancer registries supported by the National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results program.
CCFR: We graciously thank the generous contributions of our study participants, the dedication of study staff, and the financial support from the U.S. National Cancer Institute, for without each of these this important registry would not exist.
Funding
DACHS: This work was supported by the German Research Council (BR 1704/6–1, BR 1704/6–3, BR1704/6–4, 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 German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01KH0404, 01ER0814, 01ER0815,01ER1505A and 01ER1505B), the Interdisciplinary Research Program of the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Germany, and German Cancer Research Center.
Fred Hutch core grant: This research was funded in part through the NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA015704 awarded to T. Lynch.
Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO): National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (U01 CA137088; R01 CA059045 and R01 CA248857 to U. Peters and R01 CA176272 to P. Newcomb).
DALS: National Institutes of Health (R01 CA48998 to M. L. Slattery).
Harvard cohorts (HPFS, NHS, PHS): HPFS is supported by the National Institutes of Health (P01 CA055075 to E. Giovannucci, UM1 CA167552 to W. Willett, U01 CA167552 to W. Willett, R01 CA137178 to A. Chan, R01 CA151993 and R35CA197735 to S. Ogino), NHS by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA137178 to A. Chan, P01 CA087969 to E. Giovannucci, UM1 CA186107 to M. Stampfer, R01 CA151993 and R35 CA197735 to S. Ogino) and PHS by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA042182 to M. Stampfer).
Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS) cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further augmented by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council grants 209057, 396414 and 1074383 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. Cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, including the National Death Index and the Australian Cancer Database.
CPS-II: The American Cancer Society funds the creation, maintenance, and updating of the Cancer Prevention Study-II (CPS-II) cohort. This study was conducted with Institutional Review Board approval.
Footnotes
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Benning TM, Dellaert BG, Dirksen CD, et al. Preferences for potential innovations in non-invasive colorectal cancer screening: A labeled discrete choice experiment for a Dutch screening campaign. Acta oncologica. 2014;53(7):898–908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Blom J, Kilpelainen S, Hultcrantz R, et al. Five-year experience of organized colorectal cancer screening in a Swedish population - increased compliance with age, female gender, and subsequent screening round. Journal of medical screening. 2014;21(3):144–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Brenner H, Stock C, Hoffmeister M. Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ. 2014;348:g2467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Price TJ, Segelov E, Burge M, et al. Current opinion on optimal treatment for colorectal cancer. Expert review of anticancer therapy. 2013;13(5):597–611. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Braun MS, Richman SD, Quirke P, et al. Predictive biomarkers of chemotherapy efficacy in colorectal cancer: results from the UK MRC FOCUS trial. JClinOncol. 2008;26(16):2690–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.McMillan DC. The systemic inflammation-based Glasgow Prognostic Score: a decade of experience in patients with cancer. Cancer Treat Rev. 2013;39(5):534–40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Tsai PL, Su WJ, Leung WH, et al. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and CEA level as prognostic and predictive factors in colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Ther. 2016;12(2):582–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Templeton AJ, McNamara MG, Seruga B, et al. Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014;106(6):dju124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Ishizuka M, Nagata H, Takagi K, et al. Inflammation-based prognostic system predicts postoperative survival of colorectal cancer patients with a normal preoperative serum level of carcinoembryonic antigen. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(11):3422–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Quail DF, Joyce JA. Microenvironmental regulation of tumor progression and metastasis. Nat Med. 2013;19(11):1423–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Sakaguchi S, Miyara M, Costantino CM, et al. FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in the human immune system. NatRevImmunol. 2010;10(7):490–500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Savage PA, Malchow S, Leventhal DS. Basic principles of tumor-associated regulatory T cell biology. Trends Immunol. 2013;34(1):33–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Shang B, Liu Y, Jiang SJ, et al. Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating FoxP3+ regulatory T cells in cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientific reports. 2015;5:15179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Chew A, Salama P, Robbshaw A, et al. SPARC, FOXP3, CD8 and CD45 correlation with disease recurrence and long-term disease-free survival in colorectal cancer. PLoSOne. 2011;6(7):e22047. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kim M, Grimmig T, Grimm M, et al. Expression of Foxp3 in colorectal cancer but not in Treg cells correlates with disease progression in patients with colorectal cancer. PloS one. 2013;8(1):e53630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Correale P, Rotundo MS, Botta C, et al. Tumor infiltration by chemokine receptor 7 (CCR7)(+) T-lymphocytes is a favorable prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncoimmunology. 2012;1(4):531–2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Berntsson J, Svensson MC, Leandersson K, et al. The clinical impact of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in colorectal cancer differs by anatomical subsite: A cohort study. Int J Cancer. 2017;141(8):1654–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Waniczek D, Lorenc Z, Snietura M, et al. Tumor-Associated Macrophages and Regulatory T Cells Infiltration and the Clinical Outcome in Colorectal Cancer. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Hanke T, Melling N, Simon R, et al. High intratumoral FOXP3(+) T regulatory cell (Tregs) density is an independent good prognosticator in nodal negative colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(7):8227–35. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Zhuo C, Xu Y, Ying M, et al. FOXP3+ Tregs: heterogeneous phenotypes and conflicting impacts on survival outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer. Immunol Res. 2015;61(3):338–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Chen J, Chen Z. The effect of immune microenvironment on the progression and prognosis of colorectal cancer. Med Oncol. 2014;31(8):82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Buckowitz A, Knaebel HP, Benner A, et al. Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer is associated with local lymphocyte infiltration and low frequency of distant metastases. BrJCancer. 2005;92(9):1746–53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Frey DM, Droeser RA, Viehl CT, et al. High frequency of tumor-infiltrating FOXP3(+) regulatory T cells predicts improved survival in mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancer patients. IntJCancer. 2010;126(11):2635–43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Prall F, Duhrkop T, Weirich V, et al. Prognostic role of CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in stage III colorectal cancer with and without microsatellite instability. HumPathol. 2004;35(7):808–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bauer K, Nelius N, Reuschenbach M, et al. T cell responses against microsatellite instability-induced frameshift peptides and influence of regulatory T cells in colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2013;62(1):27–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Kim KJ, Lee KS, Cho HJ, et al. Prognostic implications of tumor-infiltrating FoxP3+ regulatory T cells and CD8+ cytotoxic T cells in microsatellite-unstable gastric cancers. Hum Pathol. 2014;45(2):285–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Bondurant KL, Lundgreen A, Herrick JS, et al. Interleukin genes and associations with colon and rectal cancer risk and overall survival. International journal of cancer Journal international du cancer. 2013;132(4):905–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Lilla C, Verla-Tebit E, Risch A, et al. Effect of NAT1 and NAT2 genetic polymorphisms on colorectal cancer risk associated with exposure to tobacco smoke and meat consumption. Cancer EpidemiolBiomarkers Prev. 2006;15(1):99–107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Verla-Tebit E, Lilla C, Hoffmeister M, et al. Cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer risk in Germany: a population-based case-control study. IntJCancer. 2006;119(3):630–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Peters U, Jiao S, Schumacher FR, et al. Identification of Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Tumors in a Genome-Wide Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2013;144(4):799–807 e24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Schumacher FR, Schmit SL, Jiao S, et al. Genome-wide association study of colorectal cancer identifies six new susceptibility loci. Nature communications. 2015;6:7138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Schmit SL, Edlund CK, Schumacher FR, et al. Novel Common Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Huyghe JR, Bien SA, Harrison TA, et al. Discovery of common and rare genetic risk variants for colorectal cancer. Nat Genet. 2019;51(1):76–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.McCarthy S, Das S, Kretzschmar W, et al. A reference panel of 64,976 haplotypes for genotype imputation. Nat Genet. 2016;48(10):1279–83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Das S, Forer L, Schonherr S, et al. Next-generation genotype imputation service and methods. Nat Genet. 2016;48(10):1284–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Delaneau O, Howie B, Cox AJ, et al. Haplotype estimation using sequencing reads. American journal of human genetics. 2013;93(4):687–96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Findeisen P, Kloor M, Merx S, et al. T25 repeat in the 3’ untranslated region of the CASP2 gene: a sensitive and specific marker for microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Cancer research. 2005;65(18):8072–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Carr PR, Jansen L, Bienert S, et al. Associations of red and processed meat intake with major molecular pathological features of colorectal cancer. European journal of epidemiology. 2017;32(5):409–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Schemper M, Smith TL. A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time. Control ClinTrials. 1996;17(4):343–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Grambsch PM, Therneau TM. Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals. Biometrika. 1994;81(3):515–26. [Google Scholar]
- 42.Chong DQ, Banbury BL, Phipps AI, et al. Association of family history and survival in patients with colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of eight epidemiologic studies. Cancer medicine. 2018;7(5):2192–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Peters U, Jiao S, Schumacher FR, et al. Identification of Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Tumors in a Genome-Wide Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2013;144(4):799–807 e24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Slattery ML, Anderson K, Curtin K, et al. Dietary intake and microsatellite instability in colon tumors. Int J Cancer. 2001;93(4):601–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Lee JE, Baba Y, Ng K, et al. Statin use and colorectal cancer risk according to molecular subtypes in two large prospective cohort studies. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011;4(11):1808–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Buchanan DD, Clendenning M, Rosty C, et al. Tumor testing to identify lynch syndrome in two Australian colorectal cancer cohorts. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;32(2):427–38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Boland CR, Thibodeau SN, Hamilton SR, et al. A National Cancer Institute Workshop on Microsatellite Instability for cancer detection and familial predisposition: development of international criteria for the determination of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Cancer research. 1998;58(22):5248–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.McLaren W, Pritchard B, Rios D, et al. Deriving the consequences of genomic variants with the Ensembl API and SNP Effect Predictor. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England). 2010;26(16):2069–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Deschoolmeester V, Baay M, Van ME, et al. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes: an intriguing player in the survival of colorectal cancer patients. BMCImmunol. 2010;11:19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Lee SY, Miyai K, Han HS, et al. Microsatellite instability, EMAST, and morphology associations with T cell infiltration in colorectal neoplasia. Dig Dis Sci. 2012;57(1):72–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Gatza CE, Holtzhausen A, Kirkbride KC, et al. Type III TGF-beta receptor enhances colon cancer cell migration and anchorage-independent growth. Neoplasia (New York, NY). 2011;13(8):758–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Massague J. TGFbeta in Cancer. Cell. 2008;134(2):215–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Vander Ark A, Cao J, Li X. TGF-beta receptors: In and beyond TGF-beta signaling. Cellular signalling. 2018;52:112–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Dong M, How T, Kirkbride KC, et al. The type III TGF-beta receptor suppresses breast cancer progression. The Journal of clinical investigation. 2007;117(1):206–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Turley RS, Finger EC, Hempel N, et al. The type III transforming growth factor-beta receptor as a novel tumor suppressor gene in prostate cancer. Cancer research. 2007;67(3):1090–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Jenkins LM, Singh P, Varadaraj A, et al. Altering the Proteoglycan State of Transforming Growth Factor beta Type III Receptor (TbetaRIII)/Betaglycan Modulates Canonical Wnt/beta-Catenin Signaling. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2016;291(49):25716–28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Krzystek-Korpacka M, Zawadzki M, Neubauer K, et al. Elevated systemic interleukin-7 in patients with colorectal cancer and individuals at high risk of cancer: association with lymph node involvement and tumor location in the right colon. Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII. 2017;66(2):171–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Masugi Y, Nishihara R, Yang J, et al. Tumour CD274 (PD-L1) expression and T cells in colorectal cancer. Gut. 2017;66(8):1463–73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Hamada T, Cao Y, Qian ZR, et al. Aspirin Use and Colorectal Cancer Survival According to Tumor CD274 (Programmed Cell Death 1 Ligand 1) Expression Status. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2017;35(16):1836–44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Firan M, Dhillon S, Estess P, et al. Suppressor activity and potency among regulatory T cells is discriminated by functionally active CD44. Blood. 2006;107(2):619–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Fang C, Fan C, Wang C, et al. Prognostic value of CD133+ CD54+ CD44+ circulating tumor cells in colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. Cancer Med. 2017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Lan Q, Zhou X, Fan H, et al. Polyclonal CD4+Foxp3+ Treg cells induce TGFbeta-dependent tolerogenic dendritic cells that suppress the murine lupus-like syndrome. J Mol Cell Biol. 2012;4(6):409–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Munoz NM, Upton M, Rojas A, et al. Transforming growth factor beta receptor type II inactivation induces the malignant transformation of intestinal neoplasms initiated by Apc mutation. Cancer Res. 2006;66(20):9837–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Galon J, Costes A, Sanchez-Cabo F, et al. Type, density, and location of immune cells within human colorectal tumors predict clinical outcome. Science. 2006;313(5795):1960–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Saito T, Nishikawa H, Wada H, et al. Two FOXP3(+)CD4(+) T cell subpopulations distinctly control the prognosis of colorectal cancers. Nat Med. 2016;22(6):679–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
Genotyping data of the GECCO studies are available at the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) for download at the accession number: phs001078.v1.p1.

