Cell-type aware transcriptome-wide association study of mammographic density phenotypes
Sistig, A.; Rothstein, J. H.; Zhu, S.; Head, S. T.; Chang, Y.-H.; Achacoso, N.; Alexeeff, S. E.; Arasu, V.; Gadgil, T.; Gerstley, L. D.; Margolies, L. R.; Sakoda, L. C.; Shen, L.; Smith Gueye, C. L.; Villasenor, M.; Westley, M.; MODE/BCAC Consortia, ; Bhattacharya, A.; Klein, R. J.; Habel, L. A.; Song, X.; Wang, P.; Sieh, W.
Show abstract
BackgroundMammographic density (MD) phenotypes are highly heritable and strongly associated with breast cancer risk. Genetic variants identified by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) explain only a small fraction of the heritability, and the responsible genes remain largely unknown. Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) can improve power and identify genes associated with MD through their genetically regulated gene expression (GReX) levels. However, cell-type heterogeneity in bulk tissue samples can obscure disease associations. Here, we conduct TWAS of MD phenotypes using standard approaches and a new cell-type-aware framework. MethodsThe study population included 24,158 women of European ancestry who underwent screening with Hologic (n=20,282) or GE (n=3,876) digital mammography and participated in Kaisers Research Program on Genes Environment and Health. Dense area (DA), nondense area (NDA), and percent density (PD) were measured centrally using Cumulus6. Tissue-level gene expression was estimated using standard elastic-net models. Cell-type-specific expression in mammary epithelial, fibroblast, and adipocyte cells were estimated using MiXcan2. Linear regression was used to assess associations of GReX levels with MD phenotypes, adjusted for age at mammography, BMI, and other covariates. Statistical significance was determined by controlling the false-discovery rate at 0.05. ResultsA total of 20 genes at 16 independent loci were significantly associated with MD phenotypes, including 6 novel genes at 6 independent loci not found by prior GWAS or TWAS of MD phenotypes. We discovered that one of the novel MD genes, THBS2-AS1 at 6q27, is also a novel breast cancer susceptibility locus. THBS2-AS1 expression in mammary tissue was significantly associated with decreased NDA and increased PD, and also with increased breast cancer risk in independent study populations. In comparison, standard TWAS methods identified only 8 MD genes at 7 loci that all were identified by MiXcan2. Additionally, we identified candidate genes for MD phenotypes at 10 known GWAS loci. ConclusionThis TWAS identified novel genes for MD phenotypes and breast cancer risk, and prioritized genes at known GWAS loci that are likely to be causally associated through their expression levels in mammary epithelial, fibroblast, or adipocyte cells. Disentangling the distinct effects of gene expression in different mammary cell types through cell-type-aware analysis can yield new gene discoveries and insights into the biological basis of dense vs. nondense breast tissue.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Cancer PRSweb - an Online Repository with Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) for Major Cancer Traits and Their Phenome-wide Exploration in Two Independent Biobanks 95%
- A joint transcriptome-wide association study across multiple tissues identifies new candidate susceptibility genes for breast cancer 94%
- Segregation analysis of 17,425 population-based breast cancer families: evidence for genetic susceptibility and risk prediction 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer Risk in Women of African Ancestry: a Cross-Ancestry Approach 95%
- Genomic dissection of 43 serum urate-associated loci provides multiple insights into molecular mechanisms of urate control. 91%
- Prediagnostic breast milk DNA methylation alterations in women who develop breast cancer 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.