scholarly journals Assessing a causal relationship between circulating lipids and breast cancer risk: Mendelian randomization study

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey E. Johnson ◽  
Katherine M. Siewert ◽  
Derek Klarin ◽  
Scott M. Damrauer ◽  
Kyong-Mi Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Causal Relationship ◽  
Genetic Variants ◽  
Mendelian Randomization ◽  
Plasma Lipid ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Breast Cancers

AbstractObjectiveTo assess a potential causal relationship between genetic variants associated with plasma lipid traits (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, HDL; low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL; triglycerides, TG) with risk for breast cancer.DesignMendelian randomization (MR) study.Setting and ParticipantsData from genome-wide association studies in up to 215,551 subjects from the Million Veterans Project were used to construct genetic instruments for plasma lipid traits. The effect of these instruments on breast cancer risk was evaluated using genetic data from the BCAC consortium based on 122,977 breast cancer cases and 105,974 controls.ExposuresGenetically modified plasma levels of LDL, HDL, or TG.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOdds ratio (OR) for breast cancer risk per standard-deviation increase in HDL, LDL, or TG.ResultsWe observed that a 1-SD genetically determined increase in HDL levels is associated with an increased risk for all breast cancers (HDL: OR=1.08, 95% CI=1.04-1.13, P=7.4×10−5).Multivariable MR analysis, which adjusted for the effects of LDL, TG, body mass index, and age at menarche, corroborated this observation for HDL (OR=1.06, 95% CI=1.03-1.10, P=4.9×10−4) and also a relationship between LDL and breast cancer risk (OR=1.03, 95% CI=1.01-1.07, P=0.02). We did not observe a difference in these relationships when stratified by breast tumor estrogen receptor status. We repeated this analysis using genetic variants independent of the leading association at core HDL pathway genes and found that these variants were also associated with risk for breast cancers (OR=1.11, 95% CI=1.06–1.16, P=1.5×10−6), including gene-specific associations at ABCA1, APOE-APOC1-APOC4-APOC2 and CETP. In addition, we find evidence that genetic variation at the ABO locus affects both lipid levels and breast cancer.ConclusionsGenetically elevated plasma HDL levels appear to increase breast cancer risk. Future studies are required to understand the mechanism underlying this putative causal relationship, with the goal to develop potential therapeutic strategies aimed at altering the HDL-mediated effect on breast cancer risk.

scholarly journals Association between serum lipids and breast cancer risk in premenopausal women: systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (11) ◽  
pp. 030006052110610
Author(s):  
Jing Wu ◽  
Xun Lei ◽  
Xianjun Pan ◽  
Xiaohua Zeng ◽  
Wei Li
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Serum Lipids ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Premenopausal Breast Cancer ◽  
The Impact

Objective Associations between serum lipids and their individual components with premenopausal breast cancer risk are unclear. This meta-analysis summarized the literature on serum lipids and premenopausal breast cancer risk to elucidate their relationship. Methods Eligible studies were identified by searching the PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases until 31 December 2020. Standardized mean difference (SMD) scores with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were used to assess the impact of serum lipids on premenopausal breast cancer risk. The I2 statistic was calculated to measure the percentage of heterogeneity, and Egger’s test was performed to measure publication bias. Results Thirteen studies were included. The SMD scores of triglycerides (TG) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were 12.90 (95%CI: 7.19–18.61) and 31.43 (95%CI: 8.72–54.15), respectively. The SMD scores of total cholesterol (TC) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) were not significantly different between the groups. The included studies were highly heterogeneous. There were no publication biases found in TC, LDL-C, or HDL-C analyses, whereas publication bias was present in the TG analysis. Conclusions TG and LDL-C were higher in premenopausal breast cancer patients than in women without breast cancer. However, no significant differences were found in TC or HDL-C levels.

scholarly journals A Mendelian randomization analysis of circulating lipid traits and breast cancer risk

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1117-1131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Beeghly-Fadiel ◽  
Nikhil K Khankari ◽  
Ryan J Delahanty ◽  
Xiao-Ou Shu ◽  
Yingchang Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Total Cholesterol ◽  
Mendelian Randomization ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Standard Deviation Increase ◽  
Randomization Analysis

Abstract Background Conventional epidemiologic studies have evaluated associations between circulating lipid levels and breast cancer risk, but results have been inconsistent. As Mendelian randomization analyses may provide evidence for causal inference, we sought to evaluate potentially unbiased associations between breast cancer risk and four genetically predicted lipid traits. Methods Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 164 discrete variants associated with high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides and total cholesterol. We used 162 of these unique variants to construct weighted genetic scores (wGSs) for a total of 101 424 breast cancer cases and 80 253 controls of European ancestry from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations between per standard deviation increase in genetically predicted lipid traits and breast cancer risk. Additional Mendelian randomization analysis approaches and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess pleiotropy and instrument validity. Results Corresponding to approximately 15 mg/dL, one standard deviation increase in genetically predicted HDL-C was associated with a 12% increased breast cancer risk (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.08–1.16). Findings were consistent after adjustment for breast cancer risk factors and were robust in several sensitivity analyses. Associations with genetically predicted triglycerides and total cholesterol were inconsistent, and no association for genetically predicted LDL-C was observed. Conclusions This study provides strong evidence that circulating HDL-C may be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, whereas LDL-C may not be related to breast cancer risk.

scholarly journals Height and Body Mass Index as Modifiers of Breast Cancer Risk in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: A Mendelian Randomization Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 350-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Qian ◽  
Shengfeng Wang ◽  
Jonathan Mitchell ◽  
Lesley McGuffog ◽  
Daniel Barrowdale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Mendelian Randomization ◽  
Mutation Carriers

scholarly journals Associations of obesity and circulating insulin and glucose with breast cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 795-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiang Shu ◽  
Lang Wu ◽  
Nikhil K Khankari ◽  
Xiao-Ou Shu ◽  
Thomas J Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Mendelian Randomization ◽  
Menopausal Status ◽  
Inverse Association ◽  
Fasting Insulin

Abstract Background In addition to the established association between general obesity and breast cancer risk, central obesity and circulating fasting insulin and glucose have been linked to the development of this common malignancy. Findings from previous studies, however, have been inconsistent, and the nature of the associations is unclear. Methods We conducted Mendelian randomization analyses to evaluate the association of breast cancer risk, using genetic instruments, with fasting insulin, fasting glucose, 2-h glucose, body mass index (BMI) and BMI-adjusted waist-hip-ratio (WHRadj BMI). We first confirmed the association of these instruments with type 2 diabetes risk in a large diabetes genome-wide association study consortium. We then investigated their associations with breast cancer risk using individual-level data obtained from 98 842 cases and 83 464 controls of European descent in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results All sets of instruments were associated with risk of type 2 diabetes. Associations with breast cancer risk were found for genetically predicted fasting insulin [odds ratio (OR) = 1.71 per standard deviation (SD) increase, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.26-2.31, p  =  5.09  ×  10–4], 2-h glucose (OR = 1.80 per SD increase, 95% CI = 1.3 0-2.49, p  =  4.02  ×  10–4), BMI (OR = 0.70 per 5-unit increase, 95% CI = 0.65-0.76, p  =  5.05  ×  10–19) and WHRadj BMI (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.79-0.91, p  =  9.22  ×  10–6). Stratified analyses showed that genetically predicted fasting insulin was more closely related to risk of estrogen-receptor [ER]-positive cancer, whereas the associations with instruments of 2-h glucose, BMI and WHRadj BMI were consistent regardless of age, menopausal status, estrogen receptor status and family history of breast cancer. Conclusions We confirmed the previously reported inverse association of genetically predicted BMI with breast cancer risk, and showed a positive association of genetically predicted fasting insulin and 2-h glucose and an inverse association of WHRadj BMI with breast cancer risk. Our study suggests that genetically determined obesity and glucose/insulin-related traits have an important role in the aetiology of breast cancer.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Functional Genetic Variants for Breast Cancer Risk: Results From the Shanghai Breast Cancer Study

2011 ◽  
Vol 173 (10) ◽  
pp. 1159-1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Zhang ◽  
A. Beeghly-Fadiel ◽  
W. Lu ◽  
Q. Cai ◽  
Y.-B. Xiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Genetic Variants ◽  
Cancer Study ◽  
Breast Cancer Study
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document