Trans-ancestral genetic study of diabetes mellitus risk in survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort and the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Common genetic variants with trans-ancestry associations with DM risk

We conducted ancestry-specific GWAS for clinically-ascertained DM in SJLIFE with logistic regression models adjusted for relevant clinical and sociodemographic risk factors, separately analyzing 3,102 EUR and 574 AFR survivors. To facilitate discovery of common loci with trans-ancestral DM risk effects in survivors, we prioritized all variants within a 100-kb window of the most significantly associated index variant (P<5×10^-6) with effect allele frequencies (EAFs) ≥1% in both SJLIFE EUR and AFR samples for further investigation, using trans-ancestral replication (i.e., replication between ancestry groups, with a Bonferroni-corrected p-value threshold) and trans-ancestry meta-analysis to declare genome-wide significance (P<5×10^-8) (see Methods). We then utilized available data from CCSS EUR survivors for replication of GWAS findings that were genome-wide significant in the EUR-specific GWAS, and for secondary replication of genome-wide significant trans-ancestry meta-analysis findings. Replication in a second sample of AFR survivors was not feasible in CCSS due to sample size limitations (N=149, with 6 cases).

Genetic variants with replicated trans-ancestral and ancestry-specific DM risk effects are shown in Table 2 (Manhattan and quantile-quantile plots from SJLIFE ancestry-specific GWAS provided in Supplementary Figures 1 and 2). In the EUR-specific GWAS in SJLIFE, we identified one genome-wide significant locus on 8q11.21 within SNTG1 (syntrophin-gamma 1) (Supplementary Figure 1). The most significantly associated variant at 8q11.21 in the SJLIFE EUR discovery dataset was rs6993752 (OR=1.99, 95% CI: 1.56-2.55; P=4.4×10^-8) (Table 2, Supplementary Table 3), replicating in CCSS EUR survivors (OR=1.56, 95% CI: 1.12-2.17; P=8.1×10^-3) (Table 2, Supplementary Tables 4, 5). In SJLIFE AFR survivors, these 8q11.21 variants were associated with DM (P<0.05) but showed ancestral allelic effect heterogeneity (Supplementary Table 3), which can occur due to differences in LD with causal variants, environment, or polygenic background across ancestrally diverse populations¹⁶. Effect allele frequencies for 8q11.21 variants were generally higher in SJLIFE AFR survivors, but showed a broken pattern of LD in the AFR 1000 Genomes reference panel relative to rs6993752 which was not observed in EUR samples (Supplementary Figure 4).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1:

Diabetes mellitus risk associations for replicated index SNPs, stratified by previous treatment with alkylating agents and adiposity. Each panel shows stratified odds ratios (circles) and 95% confidence intervals (whiskers) for the study samples described on the x-axis. Panels A-C show diabetes mellitus risk associations for the risk alleles at the 2p25.3, 5p15.2, and 19p12 loci, respectively, stratified by treatment with alkylating agents (unexposed: black; exposed: blue) in SJLIFE ancestry samples (EUR, European ancestry; AFR, African ancestry). For panels A and C, alkylating agent doses ≥4,000 mg/m² versus none are contrasted, while for panel B, any versus no exposure to alkylating agents are shown (due to lower effect allele frequencies). Panel D shows associations between the risk allele at the 8q11.21 locus (rs6993752) in EUR survivors in SJLIFE and CCSS, stratified by lower body mass index (BMI≤25 kg/m², in black) and higher BMI (>25 kg/m², highlighted in red).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2:

Multi-ancestry PRS quintile associations with diabetes mellitus odds in childhood cancer survivor cohort subgroups defined by ancestry and treatment with alkylating agents (AA). Associations between the top quintile (relative to the lowest quintile) of a general population multi-ancestry PRS for type 2 diabetes (Mahajan et al.) and odds of diabetes mellitus in SJLIFE AFR survivors (red), the combined SJLIFE and CCSS cohort of EUR survivors (purple), SJLIFE EUR survivors (light blue), and the combined CCSS EUR survivor cohorts (dark blue) are shown (odds ratios or ORs as circles and corresponding 95% confidence intervals as whiskers). Top PRS quintile ORs and corresponding p-values are annotated for SJLIFE AFR survivors exposed to any AA and for EUR survivors not exposed to abdominal radiation therapy who were treated with high-dose AA (≥4000 mg/m²).

We also prioritized two loci with suggestive associations with DM risk (P<5×10^-6) identified among SJLIFE EUR survivors: 2p25.3, represented by three variants upstream of MYT1L (myelin transcription factor 1 like; most significantly associated [index] variant rs143578296: OR=1.99, 95% CI: 1.49-2.66; P=2.8×10^-6) and 19p12, represented by five variants upstream of ZNF492 (zinc finger protein 492; index variant rs35017858: OR=2.26, 95% CI: 1.60-3.20; P=4.1×10^-6) (Table 2, Figure 1). We found that all variants at the 2p25.3 and 19p12 loci were replicated in SJLIFE AFR survivors (Supplementary Table 3) at nominal significance (P<0.05), while the locus index SNPs were replicated under a Bonferroni-corrected p-value threshold that accounted for the number of tested SNPs. The index SNPs at 2p25.3 and 19p12 attained genome-wide significance in trans-ancestry meta-analysis (2p25.3, rs143578296: OR=2.05, 95% CI: 1.59-2.65, P=4.5×10^-8; 19p12, rs35017858: OR=2.43, 95% CI: 1.80-3.28; P=5.7×10^-9). Variants at the 2p25.3 locus were also replicated in CCSS EUR survivors (rs55726572 as the best LD proxy, OR=1.45, 95% CI: 1.00-2.10, P=0.047).

In the AFR-specific GWAS in SJLIFE, we identified a novel variant at the 5p15.2 locus (Supplementary Figure 5) with suggestive significance (rs13436710: OR=10.19, 95% CI: 4.12- 25.21, P=5.1×10^-7). While variants in LD with rs13436710 were low-frequency in EUR samples (EAF ∼1%), index/proxy variants replicated in both SJLIFE EUR (OR=2.47, 95% CI: 1.23-4.98, P=0.011) and CCSS EUR (OR=1.48, 95% CI: 1.06-2.07, P=0.021) survivors.

We examined associations between all available replicated common index variants and self-reported and ICD-coded T2D that were tested in the UK Biobank Study (UKBB; N>361,000) (Supplementary Table 6). The T2D risk effect sizes in the UKBB were extremely modest (OR<1.002) for the index variant at the 2p25.3 locus (rs143578296), which showed nominal association with ICD-10-coded T2D risk (P=3.6×10^-3), and the index variant at the 19p12 locus (rs35017858), which showed nominal association with self-reported T2D risk (P=6.6×10^-3).

Allelic risks for developing DM and the contributions of cancer treatments and adiposity

We investigated whether replicated DM risk variants from common variant analyses in survivors potentially modified DM risk effects following exposures to specific cancer treatments. While risk alleles at the 2p25.3, 5p15.2, and 19p12 loci did not appear to modify abdominal RT-related DM risk effects in both SJLIFE EUR and AFR survivors (Supplementary Table 7), index variants at these loci were associated with appreciably greater DM risks among SJLIFE EUR and AFR survivors treated with alkylating agents, i.e., alkylating agent-related risk effect modifications seen in the discovery data were replicated in another ancestral dataset (Figure 1, Supplementary Table 8). The magnitude of DM associations in SJLIFE AFR survivors treated with alkylating agents was greater for all variants compared to those seen in SJLIFE EUR survivors treated with alkylating agents. For example, the 19p12 index DM risk allele (rs35017858) identified in SJLIFE EUR survivors was associated with 3.3-fold greater DM odds in SJLIFE EUR survivors with high-dose alkylating agent exposures (95% CI: 1.91-5.79, P=2.3×10^-5), but 5.7-fold greater DM odds in the replication dataset of SJLIFE AFR survivors with high-dose alkylating agent exposures (95% CI: 1.99-16.54, P=1.2×10^-3). Corresponding allelic risks among survivors without this treatment exposure was appreciably lower (EUR: OR=1.63, P=0.22; AFR: OR=2.00, P=0.096). From the SJLIFE AFR discovery GWAS, the 5p15.2 index variant (rs13436710) risk allele was associated with 17.8-fold (95% CI: 3.46-91.60, P=5.7×10^-4) greater odds of DM in alkylating agent-exposed AFR survivors, in contrast to the 3.3-fold (95% CI: 1.44-7.68, P=5.0×10^-3) greater DM odds observed in the replication dataset of SJLIFE EUR survivors. In comparison, corresponding allelic risks among survivors without this treatment exposure were lower (EUR: OR=1.27, P=0.73; AFR: OR=10.84, P=2.1×10^-4).

The index variant at the 8q11.21 locus (rs6993752) did not show evidence of modifying DM risks related to abdominal RT or alkylating agents. Given treatment with abdominal RT has been previously linked to lower adiposity among survivors¹⁷ but obesity is strongly associated with other cancer treatments and DM risk⁶, we evaluated whether this DM risk allele showed significant effect heterogeneity by adiposity. Overweight/obese (BMI>25 kg/m²) EUR survivors in SJLIFE were significantly more likely to have received cranial RT (P<0.001) or corticosteroids (P<0.001). We found that DM risks associated with the risk allele at the 8q11.21 locus index variant (rs6993752) were appreciably greater among overweight/obese EUR survivors in SJLIFE (OR_BMI>25=2.23, 95% CI: 1.72-2.89, P=1.8×10^-9 versus OR_BMI≤25=0.90, P=0.80) and CCSS (OR_BMI>25=1.69, 95% CI: 1.15-2.47, P=7.0×10^-3 versus OR_BMI≤25=1.18, P=0.63) (Figure 1, Supplementary Table 9).

T2D polygenic risk in survivors

We assessed whether T2D PRSs derived in non-cancer study populations were associated with DM risk in childhood cancer survivors, and in particular, whether a 338-variant T2D PRS based on general population multi-ancestry GWAS meta-analyses¹¹ also had increased transferability in survivors of AFR ancestry. We found standard deviation increases in the multi-ancestry T2D PRS were significantly associated with increased odds of DM in all SJLIFE and CCSS survivor cohorts (SJLIFE AFR: OR=1.80, P=2.8×10^-3; SJLIFE/CCSS EUR: ORs=1.57-1.84, P<9.5×10^-4) (Table 3). While a ∼6.9 million-variant PRS derived from a T2D GWAS in Europeans¹⁸ was also associated with DM in all SJLIFE and CCSS EUR survivor cohorts (ORs: 2.16-3.06, P<6.8×10^-4), this EUR-only PRS was not associated with DM in SJLIFE AFR survivors (OR=0.97, P=0.95).

The 338-variant multi-ancestry T2D PRS¹¹ was further evaluated for potential treatment-related DM risk effect modification (Figure 2, Supplementary Table 10). No consistent evidence of variation in the odds of DM by abdominal RT exposures was observed (top vs. lowest PRS quintile in SJLIFE and CCSS EUR survivors with no abdominal RT exposures: OR_Q5=4.90, P=3.6×10^-13, versus with abdominal RT exposures ≥20 Gy: OR_Q5=3.56, P=2.5×10^-5). However, the multi-ancestry T2D PRS was consistently associated with increasing odds of DM among EUR and AFR survivors treated with alkylating agents (Figure 2). The top T2D PRS quintile was associated with 4.1-fold greater odds of DM (95% CI: 2.16-7.69; P=1.5×10^-5) in SJLIFE and CCSS EUR survivors who were not treated with alkylating agents, whereas an 8.4-fold greater odds of DM (95% CI: 4.06-17.53; P=1.1×10^-8) was observed in those with the same level of polygenic risk but were treated with alkylating agent doses ≥4,000 mg/m². A similar trend was seen in SJLIFE AFR survivors, where those in the top T2D PRS quintile who were treated with any alkylating agents had 13.9-fold greater DM odds (95% CI: 1.24-154.48, P=0.033) than those in the lowest.

Rare pathogenic variant burden in the XNDC1N gene and DM risk

For genome-wide gene-based rare variant burden analyses using pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants, we randomly split the SJLIFE EUR cohort a priori into discovery (N=1,550) and replication (N=1,552) datasets (see Methods). In the rare variant association analysis, we identified two genes with P/LP variant burden enrichment suggestively associated with DM in the SJLIFE EUR discovery sample (N=1,550; P<1.0×10^-3): XNDC1N (XRCC1 N-terminal domain containing 1, N-terminal like; burden test P=8.5×10^-4) and ZNF655 (zinc finger protein 655; burden test P=7.1×10^-4) (Supplementary Table 11). In the separate replication analysis (N=1,552), only XNDC1N remained significantly associated (P=7.1×10^-4). In the combined data, the association between DM risk and XNDC1N P/LP burden was genome-wide significant (Bonferroni-corrected P<0.05/679 genes=7.4×10^-5). Carrying either of the two XNDC1N P/LP variants conferred 8.65 greater odds of DM risk (MAF=0.003, 95% CI: 3.02- 24.74; burden test P=8.1×10^-6) (Table 4). Single variant analyses further revealed that both XNDC1N P/LP variants contribute to increased DM risk (Supplementary Table 12). For secondary validation, we compared XNDC1N rare pathogenic risk allele frequencies among healthy EUR adults in the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD) to SJLIFE EUR survivor controls and cases (Supplementary Table 13). Compared to healthy gnomAD controls, the odds of carrying XNDC1N risk alleles among SJLIFE EUR controls were similar. In contrast, the odds of carrying these risk alleles were significantly higher among survivors with DM compared to healthy gnomAD controls (rs200142185: OR=4.72, 95% CI: 1.33-13.94, P=8.8×10^-3; rs771623613, OR=19.77, 95% CI: 2.26-236.43, P=3.2×10^-3).

In silico functional annotation of DM risk variants

Functional annotations for all novel DM risk variants are provided in Supplementary Tables 14 and 15. The DM risk allele at the 8q11.21 locus index variant (rs6993752) is associated with SNTG1-region hypermethylation in BIOS QTL¹⁹ and overlaps putative promoter and enhancer chromatin states in liver and pancreas epigenomes. Index variants at 2p25.3, 5p15.2, and 19p12, all with evidence of trans-ancestral DM risk effects, overlap regions annotated with a Polycomb-repressed chromatin state in pancreatic cells. The 5p15.2 index variant risk allele is associated with increased alternative FAM173B splicing²⁰, while the 19p12 index variant risk allele is associated with decreased transcription of nearby zinc finger proteins (ZNF257, ZNF492) in multiple tissues²⁰. The XNDC1N rare pathogenic alleles are protein-truncating variants, overlapping transcribed regions in fat, liver, and pancreas epigenomes.

Study population

For this study, we used data from childhood cancer survivors enrolled in two large retrospectively constructed cohort studies with prospective follow-up of late outcomes: the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort³⁷ (SJLIFE), for discovery analyses, trans-ancestral replication, and trans-ancestry meta-analysis, and the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study³⁸ (CCSS), for EUR-specific GWAS replication and secondary replication of findings from trans-ancestry meta-analysis. This study was approved by the institutional review boards at all participating study centers, including St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (SJCRH). All participants provided written informed consent.

Clinical risk factors and DM ascertainment

Data related to cancer treatments were abstracted from the medical record. Alkylating agent cumulative dose within five years of primary cancer diagnosis was abstracted and quantified as cyclophosphamide-equivalent dose⁴¹. Using data from the review of individual RT records, abdominal RT dose was estimated from the maximum tumor dose or total delivered dose from all overlapping abdominal RT fields⁴². Body mass index (BMI) for SJLIFE participants was calculated from height and weight measurements taken during the most recent campus study visit and adjusted for amputation, while BMI for CCSS participants was calculated from self-reported height and weight measurements from the most recently completed survey.

In SJLIFE, diabetes mellitus (DM) status was clinically ascertained. Participants with symptomatic diabetes, use of oral medications or insulin to treat diabetes, or blood tests consistent with DM diagnosis (fasting blood glucose ≥126 mg/dL, random glucose ≥200 mg/dL or HbA1c ≥6.5%) were considered to be DM cases in accordance with the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03 classification system⁴³ (CTCAE grades ≥2). While the prevalence of type 1 diabetes is low in survivors^{5, 6}, further steps were taken to reduce the probability of including DM cases that were unlikely to be T2D. Clinical information was used to exclude participants with transient treatment-related hyperglycemia requiring intervention, as well as participants reporting insulin use and a DM diagnosis before or within 5 years of childhood cancer diagnosis.

In CCSS, we used case definitions of DM consistent with the literature^{5, 6} based on self-reported responses from all available baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Survivors who self-reported ever using an oral diabetes medication or insulin to treat diabetes were considered to be cases. Given the potential for misclassification, we also evaluated cases defined by self-report of ever using insulin to treat diabetes in sensitivity analyses.

Genotype data

Methods used to generate genotype data in SJLIFE and CCSS have been described extensively elsewhere^44–48. In brief, paired-end WGS was performed using Illumina HiSeq X10 or NovaSeq sequencers for all participants in SJLIFE and the CCSS Expansion Cohort, generating data for common/rare variant association analyses. For the CCSS Original Cohort, DNA was genotyped using the Illumina HumanOmni5Exome array and imputed with the Haplotype Reference Consortium r1.1 reference panel using Minimac3⁴⁹; these data were used for analyses of common variants only. Sample and variant quality control measures were performed separately for the CCSS and SJLIFE autosomal variant data (Supplemental Methods). For each cohort, we identified participants of either European (EUR) or African (AFR) genetic ancestry using EIGENSTRAT-based principal components analyses of independent common variants implemented in PLINK⁵⁰ version 1.9 (Supplemental Methods).

Discovery of common trans-ancestral DM risk loci in SJLIFE

We first conducted ancestry-specific discovery GWAS for clinically-ascertained DM risk in SJLIFE, separately analyzing 3,102 EUR and 574 AFR survivors with complete phenotype and clinical covariate data. In each ancestral sample, common variants were evaluated (minor allele frequency or MAF ≥1%), including up to 10.5 million variants after excluding variants with excess missingness (>5%) and departures from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (P<1×10^-6 among controls). Similar to previous GWAS¹⁵, logistic regression models of DM prevalence adjusted for sex, age at last contact, BMI, age at primary cancer diagnosis, cumulative doses of alkylating agents and abdominal RT, and the first ten ancestry-specific principal components were evaluated, assuming an additive genetic effect model.

To facilitate discovery of common loci with multi-ancestral DM risk effects in survivors, we conducted trans-ancestral replication in SJLIFE: top risk associations identified in AFR survivors were subsequently evaluated in EUR survivors and vice versa, using the same models applied in the discovery ancestry-specific GWAS. We prioritized variants from ancestry-specific discovery analyses with association test p-values <5×10^-6 that were common (MAF ≥1%) across ancestral samples within a 100-kb window of the index variant (i.e., smallest p-value). Common variants meeting a p-value threshold accounting for Bonferroni-corrected multiple testing (0.05/number of tested variants in the locus with the index variant identified in discovery analysis) were considered to be replicated. In addition, trans-ancestry meta-analysis using the fixed-effects inverse variance-weighted method implemented in METAL⁵¹ was performed for index variants. Heterogeneity across genetic ancestral groups was examined using Cochran’s Q test⁵² and I² index⁵³. Meta-analysis for variants with evidence of ancestral allelic heterogeneity (P_het <0.05) was performed using the Han-Eskin random-effects model (RE2) in METASOFT⁵⁴.

Replication of common DM risk loci in CCSS

Replication was conducted in CCSS EUR survivors (excluding participants also enrolled in SJLIFE) for loci achieving genome-wide significance (P<5×10^-8) in EUR-specific GWAS or the trans-ancestry meta-analysis, using the same models applied in SJLIFE. Separate replication analyses were conducted in the CCSS Original (N=3,902) and Expansion (N=2,063) cohorts due to differences in the derivation of genotype data. If the index variant was unavailable for evaluation in CCSS, we considered the next best variant proxy with the highest estimate of linkage disequilibrium (LD) with the index variant in the 1000 Genomes reference population. Replication was defined by association test p-values <0.05 in either the CCSS Original or Expansion cohorts.

Treatment-and adiposity-stratified analyses of common DM risk loci

Similar to previous GWAS of late effects in survivors⁵⁵, we evaluated treatment-or adiposity-stratified genetic associations with DM risk exclusively among genome-wide significant index variants with replication evidence to identify whether selected risk factors potentially modified risks for DM in survivors. We adopted this strategy to control the type I error probability while maximizing power for discovery in small survivor cohorts instead of performing genome-wide scans of gene-treatment interactions, which suffer losses in statistical power with the burden of multiple testing especially when considering several cancer treatment classes and dose definitions. Therefore, we examined replicated index variant associations with DM stratified by the two types of cancer treatments linked to DM^{5, 6}: exposures to abdominal RT (none versus any) and alkylating agents (none versus any and lower versus higher dose [≥4,000 mg/m²] among those with no abdominal RT exposures). Due to the limited sample size of SJLIFE AFR survivors, alkylating agent-stratified analyses were not further stratified by abdominal RT exposures in this sample. Notably, obesity is strongly associated with treatment exposures and DM risk⁶, but abdominal RT is correlated with lower adiposity among survivors¹⁷. Because some DM-associated loci in survivors may not modify risks linked to abdominal RT or alkylating agents but instead modify obesity-associated risks for DM (e.g., involving cranial irradiation), we also conducted adiposity-stratified analyses (BMI≤25 kg/m² versus being overweight or obese, BMI>25 kg/m²) for loci showing no clear DM risk effect heterogeneity with exposures to these two treatments. All statistical models assessed were adjusted for the same covariates, only omitting specific covariates directly related to the stratification type as appropriate.

External T2D polygenic risk scores (PRSs)

For each survivor, we computed two published T2D PRSs derived from GWAS performed in non-cancer populations. First, we calculated a ∼6.9 million variant “European ancestry-only” PRS, derived from a European-ancestry T2D GWAS with 26,676 cases and 132,532 controls⁵⁶, which was subsequently developed and validated in the predominantly European UK Biobank cohort¹⁸ (PGS Catalog: PGS000014). We also calculated a “multi-ancestry” PRS with 338 variants from a GWAS meta-analysis with 180,834 cases and >1.1 million controls (∼49% non-European ancestry)¹¹. We implemented recommended best practices for PRS computation⁵⁷ to calculate all PRSs using original publication weights to support comparability across studies, including common biallelic risk variants (minor allele frequency ≥1%) of unambiguous strand. All PRSs were generated in our data using PLINK v1.90b (--score)⁵⁰. Adjusted associations between DM risk and standard deviation increases in scaled PRS values and PRS quintiles were evaluated among SJLIFE and CCSS survivors.

Genome-wide analysis of genes enriched with pathogenic rare variant burden

For genome-wide gene-based rare variant burden analyses, we randomly split the SJLIFE EUR cohort a priori into approximately equal-sized discovery (N=1,550) and replication (N=1,552) datasets using the median last contact follow-up date (October 15, 2019). Given our limited sample size for discovery, we conducted gene-based rare variant burden tests^58–61, an approach that compares the number of individuals carrying specific types of rare variants at a given gene among cases and controls and which is most powerful when the set of rare variants affect risk in the same direction and with similar magnitude⁶², using EPACTS⁶³. Specifically, we considered rare variants (MAF<1% and minor allele counts ≥3) that were annotated as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) based on functional/deleteriousness prediction algorithms, aggregated by gene with respect to the Ensembl⁶⁴ (release 105) gene model (see Supplementary Methods). Associations with DM risk for genes enriched with protein-altering variant burden (with ≥2 variants per gene) with discovery association test p-values <1.0×10^-3 were prioritized and were considered to be replicated if the gene-based P/LP burden met a p-value threshold accounting for multiple comparisons (0.05/number of prioritized genes from the discovery analysis) in the replication set. Among genes with replicated rare variant burden test associations, the p-value threshold for genome-wide significance for the combined study sample was set at P<7.4×10^-5, accounting for a total of 679 genes with protein-altering variant burden enrichments.

Bioinformatics analyses of genome-wide significant DM risk loci

We examined genome-wide significant index variants that were successfully replicated for associations with diabetes mellitus risk in the NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog⁶⁵. Index variant associations in the general population using publicly available GWAS summary statistics for EUR participants in the UK Biobank Study⁶⁶ for both self-reported T2D (N=361,141, with 2,292 cases) and ICD-10-coded T2D (N=361,194, with 888 cases) were extracted (http://www.nealelab.is/uk-biobank/). In silico functional/regulatory annotations for all genome-wide significant DM risk loci were obtained using external genomic data resources (Supplemental Methods).

Data availability

Genotype and phenotype data for all SJLIFE survivors and a subset of CCSS survivors whose childhood cancer was diagnosed between 1987 and 1999 are accessible through the St. Jude Cloud (https://stjude.cloud). For CCSS survivors diagnosed between 1970 and 1986, genotype data are available through the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP accession number: phs001327.v2.p1) and relevant phenotype data may be requested through https://ccss.stjude.org/.