Abstract
Background
Polygenic hazard scores (PHS) can identify individuals with increased risk of prostate cancer. We estimated the benefit of additional SNPs on performance of a previously validated PHS (PHS46).
Materials and method
180 SNPs, shown to be previously associated with prostate cancer, were used to develop a PHS model in men with European ancestry. A machine-learning approach, LASSO-regularized Cox regression, was used to select SNPs and to estimate their coefficients in the training set (75,596 men). Performance of the resulting model was evaluated in the testing/validation set (6,411 men) with two metrics: (1) hazard ratios (HRs) and (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. HRs were estimated between individuals with PHS in the top 5% to those in the middle 40% (HR95/50), top 20% to bottom 20% (HR80/20), and bottom 20% to middle 40% (HR20/50). PPV was calculated for the top 20% (PPV80) and top 5% (PPV95) of PHS as the fraction of individuals with elevated PSA that were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy.
Results
166 SNPs had non-zero coefficients in the Cox model (PHS166). All HR metrics showed significant improvements for PHS166 compared to PHS46: HR95/50 increased from 3.72 to 5.09, HR80/20 increased from 6.12 to 9.45, and HR20/50 decreased from 0.41 to 0.34. By contrast, no significant differences were observed in PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer.
Conclusions
Incorporating 120 additional SNPs (PHS166 vs PHS46) significantly improved HRs for prostate cancer, while PPV of PSA testing remained the same.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 4 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $64.75 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data used in this work were obtained from the Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer Associated Alterations in the Genome (PRACTICAL) consortium. Readers who are interested in accessing the data must first submit a proposal to the Data Access Committee. If the reader is not a member of the consortium, their concept form must be sponsored by a principal investigator (PI) of one of the PRACTICAL consortium member studies. If approved by the Data Access Committee, PIs within the consortium, each of whom retains ownership of their data submitted to the consortium, can then choose to participate in the specific proposal. In addition, portions of the data are available for request from dbGaP (database of Genotypes and Phenotypes) which is maintained by the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gap/?term=Icogs+prostatehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gap/?term=Icogs+prostate. Anyone can apply to join the consortium. The eligibility requirements are listed here: http://practical.icr.ac.uk/blog/?page_id=9. Joining the consortium would not guarantee access, as a proposal for access would still be submitted to the Data Access Committee, but there would be no need for a separate member sponsor. Readers may find information about application by using the contact information below: Rosalind Eeles Principal Investigator for PRACTICAL Professor of Oncogenetics Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) Sutton, UK Email: PRACTICAL@icr.ac.uk URL: http://practical.icr.ac.uk Tel: ++44 (0)20 8722 4094.
References
Seibert TM, Fan CC, Wang Y, Zuber V, Karunamuni R, Parsons JK, et al. Polygenic hazard score to guide screening for aggressive prostate cancer: Development and validation in large scale cohorts. BMJ. 2018;360:1–7.
Huynh-Le MP, Myklebust TÅ, Feng CH, Karunamuni R, Johannesen TB, Dale AM, et al. Age dependence of modern clinical risk groups for localized prostate cancer—a population-based study. Cancer. 2020;126:1691–9.
Pashayan N, Duffy SW, Chowdhury S, Dent T, Burton H, Neal DE, et al. Polygenic susceptibility to prostate and breast cancer: Implications for personalised screening. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1656–63.
Witte JS. Personalized prostate cancer screening: improving PSA tests with genomic information. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2:1–5.
Chen H, Liu X, Brendler CB, Ankerst DP, Leach RJ, Goodman PJ, et al. Adding genetic risk score to family history identifies twice as many high-risk men for prostate cancer: Results from the prostate cancer prevention trial. Prostate. 2016;76:1120–9.
Huynh-Le M-P, Fan CC, Karunamuni R, Thompson WK, Martinez ME, Eeles RA, et al. Polygenic hazard score is associated with prostate cancer in multi-ethnic populations. medRxiv. 2020:1–34.
Schumacher FR, Al Olama AA, Berndt SI, Benlloch S, Ahmed M, Saunders EJ, et al. Association analyses of more than 140,000 men identify 63 new prostate cancer susceptibility loci. Nat Genet. 2018;50:928–36.
Kote-Jarai Z, Easton DF, Stanford JL, Ostrander EA, Schleutker J, Ingles SA, et al. Multiple novel prostate cancer predisposition loci confirmed by an international study: The PRACTICAL consortium. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2008;17:2052–61.
Eeles RA, Olama AAAl, Benlloch S, Saunders EJ, Leongamornlert DA, Tymrakiewicz M, et al. Identification of 23 new prostate cancer susceptibility loci using the iCOGS custom genotyping array. Nat Genet. 2013;45:385–91.
Tibshiranit BR. Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. J R Stat Soc B. 1996:267–88.
Tibshirani R. The lasso method for variable selection in the cox model. Stat Med. 1997;16:385–95.
Mavaddat N, Michailidou K, Dennis J, Lush M, Fachal L, Lee A, et al. Polygenic risk scores for prediction of breast cancer and breast cancer subtypes. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;104:21–34.
Amos CI, Dennis J, Wang Z, Byun J, Schumacher FR, Gayther SA, et al. The oncoarray consortium: a network for understanding the genetic architecture of common cancers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2017;26:126–35.
Eeles R. Prostate cancer genome-wide association study from 89,000 men using the OncoArray chip to identify novel prostate cancer susceptibility loci. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:1525.
Karunamuni RA, Huynh-Le MP, Fan CC, Eeles RA, Easton DF, Kote-Jarai ZsS, et al. The effect of sample size on polygenic hazard models for prostate cancer. Eur J Hum Genet. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0664-2.
Li Y, Byun J, Cai G, Xiao X, Han Y, Cornelis O, et al. FastPop: a rapid principal component derived method to infer intercontinental ancestry using genetic data. BMC Bioinforma. 2016;17:1–8.
Heller G. A measure of explained risk in the proportional hazards model. Biostatistics. 2012;13:315–25.
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Prostate Cancer. Version 1.2019.
Therneau TM, Li H. Computing the Cox model for case cohort designs. Lifetime Data Anal. 1999;5:99–112.
Huynh-Le M-P, Fan CC, Karunamuni R, Walsh EI, Turner EL, Lane JA, et al. A genetic risk score to personalize prostate cancer screening, applied to population data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29:1731–8.
Prostate Cancer Incidence Statistics Cancer Research UK. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/prostate-cancer/incidence#heading-one. Accessed 23 Jul 2020.
Martin RM, Donovan JL, Turner EL, Metcalfe C, Young GJ, Walsh EI, et al. Effect of a low-intensity PSA-based screening intervention on prostate cancer mortality: the CAP randomized clinical trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2018;319:883–95.
Landrum MJ, Lee JM, Riley GR, Jang W, Rubinstein WS, Church DM, et al. ClinVar: Public archive of relationships among sequence variation and human phenotype. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:980–85.
Torkamani A, Wineinger NE, Topol EJ. The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19:581–90.
Pashayan N, Duffy SW, Neal DE, Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Martin RM, et al. Implications of polygenic risk-stratified screening for prostate cancer on overdiagnosis. Genet Med. 2015;17:789–95.
Pashayan N, Pharoah PDP, Schleutker J, Talala K, Tammela TLJ, Määttänen L, et al. Reducing overdiagnosis by polygenic risk-stratified screening: findings from the Finnish section of the ERSPC. Br J Cancer. 2015;113:1086–93.
Wang TJ, Larson MG, Levy D, Benjamin EJ, Leip EP, Omland T, et al. Plasma natriuretic peptide levels and the risk of cardiovascular events and death. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:655–63.
Yang X, Leslie G, Gentry-Maharaj A, Ryan A, Intermaggio M, Lee A, et al. Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for ovarian cancer risk prediction in a prospective cohort study. J Med Genet. 2018;55:546–54.
Yeh HC, Duncan BB, Schmidt MI, Wang NY, Brancati FL. Smoking, smoking cessation, and risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:10–7.
Ren S, Xu J, Zhou T, Jiang H, Chen H, Liu F, et al. Plateau effect of prostate cancer risk-associated SNPs in discriminating prostate biopsy outcomes. Prostate. 2013;73:1824–35.
Forgetta V, Keller-baruch J, Forest M, Durand A, Bhatnagar S, Kemp JP, et al. Development of a polygenic risk score to improve screening for fracture risk: a genetic risk prediction study. PLoS Med. 2020;17:1–19.
Chen T-H, Chatterjee N, Landi MT, Shi J. A penalized regression framework for building polygenic risk models based on summary statistics from genome-wide association studies and incorporating external information. J Am Stat Assoc. 2020;1459:1–19.
Karunamuni R, Huynh-Le M-P, Fan CC, Thompson W, Eeles RA, Kote-Jarai Z, et al. African-specific improvement of a polygenic hazard score for age at diagnosis of prostate cancer. International Journal of Cancer. 2021;148:99–105.
McNeish DM. Using Lasso for predictor selection and to assuage overfitting: a method long overlooked in behavioral sciences. Multivar Behav Res. 2015;50:471–84.
Funding
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), the University of California Cancer Research Coordinating Committee (#C21CR2060), the Research Council of Norway (#223273), KG Jebsen Stiftelsen, and South East Norway Health Authority.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors declare no personal or financial conflicts of interest for the submitted work except as follows. CCF is a scientific consultant for CorTechs Labs, Inc. RE reports honorarium as a speaker for GU-ASCO meeting in San Francisco Jan 2016, support from Janssen, and honorarium as speaker for RMH-FR meeting Nov 2017. She reports honorarium as a speaker at the University of Chicago invited talk May 2018, and an educational honorarium by Bayer & Ipsen to attend GU Connect “Treatment sequencing for mCRPC patients within the changing landscape of mHSPC” at ESMO Barcelona, Sep 2019. She reports member of external Expert Committee on the Prostate Dx Advisory Panel. OAA received speaker’s honorarium from Lundbeck, and is a consultant for Healthlytix. AMD reports that he was a founder and holds equity in CorTechs Labs Inc., and serves on its Scientific Advisory Board. He is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Human Longevity, Inc., and the Mohn Medical Imaging and Visualization Centre. He received funding through research grants from GE Healthcare to UCSD. The terms of these arrangements have been reviewed by and approved by UCSD in accordance with its conflict of interest policies. TMS reports honoraria, outside of the present work, from: University of Rochester, Varian Medical Systems, Multimodal Imaging Servcies Corporation; and WebMD. He reports research funding from NIH/NBIB, U.S. Department of Defense, Radiological Society of North America, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Varian Medical Systems.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Karunamuni, R.A., Huynh-Le, MP., Fan, C.C. et al. Additional SNPs improve risk stratification of a polygenic hazard score for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 24, 532–541 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-00311-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-00311-2
This article is cited by
-
PRState: Incorporating genetic ancestry in prostate cancer risk scores for men of African ancestry
BMC Cancer (2022)
-
Prostate cancer risk stratification improvement across multiple ancestries with new polygenic hazard score
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2022)
-
Common genetic and clinical risk factors: association with fatal prostate cancer in the Cohort of Swedish Men
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2021)
-
KLK3 SNP–SNP interactions for prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness
Scientific Reports (2021)