Back

Prioritizing context-specific genetic risk mechanisms in 11 solid cancers

Wu, X.; Kim, A.; Breeze, C. E.; O'Mara, T. A.; Ramachandran, D.; Dork, T.; Koutros, S.; Rothman, N.; Prokunina-Olsson, L.; Mancuso, N.; Lindstroem, S.; Kraft, P.

2025-11-02 epidemiology
10.1101/2025.10.30.25339145 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundWhile genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified hundreds of cancer-associated genetic variants, the specific biological contexts where these variants exert their effects remain largely unknown. We aimed to prioritize context-specific genetic risk mechanisms for 11 solid cancers at both genome-wide and single-variant resolutions. MethodsWe integrated cancer GWAS summary statistics from European ancestry samples (avg. n cases=47,856) with [~]1,500 context-specific annotations representing candidate cis-regulatory elements. For genome-wide analysis, we applied CT-FM, a method that leverages heritability enrichment estimates and an annotation correlation matrix to select likely disease-relevant biological contexts. After identifying putative causal SNPs (PIP[≥]0.5) via functionally informed fine-mapping, we used CT-FM-SNP to identify relevant contexts for individual variants. A combined SNP-to-gene framework was applied to construct putative {regulatory SNP-context-gene-cancer} quadruplets. ResultsStratified LD score regression analysis identified 52 annotations with significant heritability enrichment (Bonferroni-corrected P[≤]0.05). CT-FM prioritized four high-confidence (PIP[≥]0.5) biological contexts: mammary luminal epithelial cells for breast cancer, a prostate cancer epithelial cell line (VCaP) for prostate cancer, and bulk tumor tissue contexts for colorectal and renal cancers. Variant-level analysis of hundreds of putatively causal SNPs corroborated these findings and identified additional high-confidence contexts for other malignancies, including estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer and bladder cancer. A total of 489 putative regulatory quadruplets were constructed, proposing specific molecular mechanisms underlying the observed GWAS signals. ConclusionThese findings advance our understanding of genetic susceptibility to different cancers. Future work in larger, more diverse GWAS, coupled with more comprehensive annotation atlases, is essential to expand upon and validate our results.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
40.2%
2
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.3%
3
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.6%
50% of probability mass above
4
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
5
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
6
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.7%
7
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.7%
8
Breast Cancer Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.5%
9
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
10
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.5%
12
The American Journal of Human Genetics
206 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
14
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
15
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
16
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
17
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
18
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
19
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
20
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
21
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.7%
22
Human Molecular Genetics
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
24
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
25
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%