Abstract
Background Prostate cancer causes substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. Recently, a polygenic hazard score (PHS1)—the weighted sum of 54 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes—was developed and validated to predict age of aggressive prostate cancer onset in Caucasians. We evaluated the performance of the PHS for prediction of aggressive prostate cancer and of death from prostate cancer across diverse ethnic populations.
Methods 80,491 men of various self-reported race/ethnicities were included (30,575 controls, 49,916 cases. Previously determined genetic ancestries for these men were: 71,856 European, 6,253 African, and 2,382 Asian. Where applicable, age of prostate cancer diagnosis, age at last follow-up, TNM stage, PSA, Gleason score, and cause of death were also determined. Median age at last follow-up was 70 years (IQR 63-76). 3,983 men died from prostate cancer, 5,806 died from non-prostate cancer causes, and 70,702 were still alive at the end of follow-up. Patient samples were previously genotyped on a cancer-specific array; PHS1 was adapted for compatibility with this array (PHS2) and tested in the multi-ethnic dataset via Cox proportional hazards models for age of aggressive prostate cancer onset and for age at prostate-cancer-specific death.
Results PHS2 had 46 SNPs: 24 directly genotyped and 22 acceptable proxies (r2≥0.94). PHS2 was predictive of age of aggressive prostate cancer onset in the independent, multi-ethnic dataset (z=48, p<10−16) and in each genetic ancestry: European (z=46, p<10−16), Asian (z=44, p<10−16), and African (z=24, p<10−16). PHS2 was also predictive of age of prostate cancer death in the multi-ethnic dataset (z=16, p<10−16). Comparing the 80th and 20th percentiles of genetic risk, men with high PHS had a hazard ratio of 5.9 for aggressive prostate cancer and 5.7 for prostate cancer death. Within each genetic ancestry group, analogous hazard ratios for aggressive prostate cancer were 5.6, 5.2, and 2.4 for men of European, Asian, and African ancestry, respectively.
Conclusions PHS2 is highly predictive of both age of onset of aggressive prostate cancer and age of prostate-cancer-specific death in a multi-ethnic dataset. Genetic risk stratification via PHS could guide individualized screening and treatment strategies for fatal and potentially fatal prostate cancer for men of European, Asian, and African genetic ancestry.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors declare no support from any organization for the submitted work except as follows: AMD and TMS report a research grant from the US Department of Defense. OAA reports research grants from KG Jebsen Stiftelsen, Research Council of Norway, and South East Norway Health Authority. Authors declare no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years except as follows, with all of these relationships outside the present study: TMS reports honoraria from Multimodal Imaging Services Corporation for imaging segmentation, honoraria from WebMD, Inc. for educational content, as well as a past research grant from Varian Medical Systems. ASK reports advisory board memberships for Sanofi-Aventis, Dendreon, and Profound. Authors declare no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work except as follows: OAA has a patent application # U.S. 20150356243 pending; AMD also applied for this patent application and assigned it to UC San Diego. AMD has additional disclosures outside the present work: founder, equity holder, and advisory board member for CorTechs Labs, Inc.; advisory board member of Human Longevity, Inc.; recipient of nonfinancial research support from General Electric Healthcare. Additional acknowledgments for the PRACTICAL consortium and contributing studies are described in the Supplemental Material.
Funding Statement
This study was funded in part by a grant from the United States National Institute of Health/National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (#K08EB026503), United States Department of Defense (#W81XWH-13-1-0391), the Research Council of Norway (#223273), KG Jebsen Stiftelsen, and South East Norway Health Authority. The CAP trial was funded by grants C11043/A4286, C18281/A8145, C18281/A11326, and C18281/A15064 from Cancer Research UK. The UK Department of Health, National Institute of Health Research provided partial funding. RMM is supported by a Cancer Research UK Programme Grant, the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme (C18281/A19169), and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Bristol Biomedical Research Centre. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Funding for the PRACTICAL consortium member studies is detailed in the Supplemental Material.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos