Association between genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition and prostate cancer risk: A Mendelian randomisation study.
Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the second most prevalent malignancy in men worldwide. Observational studies have linked the use of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) lowering therapies with reduced risk of PrCa, which may potentially be attributable to confounding factors. In this study, we performed a drug target Mendelian randomisation (MR) analysis to evaluate the association of genetically proxied inhibition of LDL-c-lowering drug targets on risk of PrCa.
Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with LDL-c (P < 5 × 10-8) from the Global Lipids Genetics Consortium genome-wide association study (GWAS) (N = 1,320,016) and located in and around the HMGCR, NPC1L1, and PCSK9 genes were used to proxy the therapeutic inhibition of these targets. Summary-level data regarding the risk of total, advanced, and early-onset PrCa were obtained from the PRACTICAL consortium. Validation analyses were performed using genetic instruments from an LDL-c GWAS conducted on male UK Biobank participants of European ancestry (N = 201,678), as well as instruments selected based on liver-derived gene expression and circulation plasma levels of targets. We also investigated whether putative mediators may play a role in findings for traits previously implicated in PrCa risk (i.e., lipoprotein a (Lp(a)), body mass index (BMI), and testosterone). Applying two-sample MR using the inverse-variance weighted approach provided strong evidence supporting an effect of genetically proxied inhibition of PCSK9 (equivalent to a standard deviation (SD) reduction in LDL-c) on lower risk of total PrCa (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.76 to 0.96, P = 9.15 × 10-3) and early-onset PrCa (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52 to 0.95, P = 0.023). Genetically proxied HMGCR inhibition provided a similar central effect estimate on PrCa risk, although with a wider 95% CI (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.13, P = 0.244), whereas genetically proxied NPC1L1 inhibition had an effect on higher PrCa risk with a 95% CI that likewise included the null (OR = 1.34, 95% CI = 0.87 to 2.04, P = 0.180). Analyses using male-stratified instruments provided consistent results. Secondary MR analyses supported a genetically proxied effect of liver-specific PCSK9 expression (OR = 0.90 per SD reduction in PCSK9 expression, 95% CI = 0.86 to 0.95, P = 5.50 × 10-5) and circulating plasma levels of PCSK9 (OR = 0.93 per SD reduction in PCSK9 protein levels, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.997, P = 0.04) on PrCa risk. Colocalization analyses identified strong evidence (posterior probability (PPA) = 81.3%) of a shared genetic variant (rs553741) between liver-derived PCSK9 expression and PrCa risk, whereas weak evidence was found for HMGCR (PPA = 0.33%) and NPC1L1 expression (PPA = 0.38%). Moreover, genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition was strongly associated with Lp(a) levels (Beta = -0.08, 95% CI = -0.12 to -0.05, P = 1.00 × 10-5), but not BMI or testosterone, indicating a possible role for Lp(a) in the biological mechanism underlying the association between PCSK9 and PrCa. Notably, we emphasise that our estimates are based on a lifelong exposure that makes direct comparisons with trial results challenging.
Our study supports a strong association between genetically proxied inhibition of PCSK9 and a lower risk of total and early-onset PrCa, potentially through an alternative mechanism other than the on-target effect on LDL-c. Further evidence from clinical studies is needed to confirm this finding as well as the putative mediatory role of Lp(a).
Fang S
，Yarmolinsky J
，Gill D
，Bull CJ
，Perks CM
，PRACTICAL Consortium
，Davey Smith G
，Gaunt TR
，Richardson TG
... -
《-》
Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.
Survival estimation for patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases ideally should be made before a type of local treatment has already been determined. Currently available survival prediction tools, however, were generated using data from patients treated either operatively or with local radiation alone, raising concerns about whether they would generalize well to all patients presenting for assessment. The Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithm (SORG-MLA), trained with institution-based data of surgically treated patients, and the Metastases location, Elderly, Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy model (METSSS), trained with registry-based data of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, are two of the most recently developed survival prediction models, but they have not been tested on patients whose local treatment strategy is not yet decided.
(1) Which of these two survival prediction models performed better in a mixed cohort made up both of patients who received local treatment with surgery followed by radiotherapy and who had radiation alone for symptomatic bone metastases? (2) Which model performed better among patients whose local treatment consisted of only palliative radiotherapy? (3) Are laboratory values used by SORG-MLA, which are not included in METSSS, independently associated with survival after controlling for predictions made by METSSS?
Between 2010 and 2018, we provided local treatment for 2113 adult patients with skeletal metastases in the extremities at an urban tertiary referral academic medical center using one of two strategies: (1) surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy or (2) palliative radiotherapy alone. Every patient's survivorship status was ascertained either by their medical records or the national death registry from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration. After applying a priori designated exclusion criteria, 91% (1920) were analyzed here. Among them, 48% (920) of the patients were female, and the median (IQR) age was 62 years (53 to 70 years). Lung was the most common primary tumor site (41% [782]), and 59% (1128) of patients had other skeletal metastases in addition to the treated lesion(s). In general, the indications for surgery were the presence of a complete pathologic fracture or an impending pathologic fracture, defined as having a Mirels score of ≥ 9, in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of less than or equal to IV and who were considered fit for surgery. The indications for radiotherapy were relief of pain, local tumor control, prevention of skeletal-related events, and any combination of the above. In all, 84% (1610) of the patients received palliative radiotherapy alone as local treatment for the target lesion(s), and 16% (310) underwent surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy. Neither METSSS nor SORG-MLA was used at the point of care to aid clinical decision-making during the treatment period. Survival was retrospectively estimated by these two models to test their potential for providing survival probabilities. We first compared SORG to METSSS in the entire population. Then, we repeated the comparison in patients who received local treatment with palliative radiation alone. We assessed model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration analysis, Brier score, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUROC measures discrimination, which is the ability to distinguish patients with the event of interest (such as death at a particular time point) from those without. AUROC typically ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating random guessing and 1.0 a perfect prediction, and in general, an AUROC of ≥ 0.7 indicates adequate discrimination for clinical use. Calibration refers to the agreement between the predicted outcomes (in this case, survival probabilities) and the actual outcomes, with a perfect calibration curve having an intercept of 0 and a slope of 1. A positive intercept indicates that the actual survival is generally underestimated by the prediction model, and a negative intercept suggests the opposite (overestimation). When comparing models, an intercept closer to 0 typically indicates better calibration. Calibration can also be summarized as log(O:E), the logarithm scale of the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) survivors. A log(O:E) > 0 signals an underestimation (the observed survival is greater than the predicted survival); and a log(O:E) < 0 indicates the opposite (the observed survival is lower than the predicted survival). A model with a log(O:E) closer to 0 is generally considered better calibrated. The Brier score is the mean squared difference between the model predictions and the observed outcomes, and it ranges from 0 (best prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score captures both discrimination and calibration, and it is considered a measure of overall model performance. In Brier score analysis, the "null model" assigns a predicted probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome and represents a model that adds no new information. A prediction model should achieve a Brier score at least lower than the null-model Brier score to be considered as useful. The DCA was developed as a method to determine whether using a model to inform treatment decisions would do more good than harm. It plots the net benefit of making decisions based on the model's predictions across all possible risk thresholds (or cost-to-benefit ratios) in relation to the two default strategies of treating all or no patients. The care provider can decide on an acceptable risk threshold for the proposed treatment in an individual and assess the corresponding net benefit to determine whether consulting with the model is superior to adopting the default strategies. Finally, we examined whether laboratory data, which were not included in the METSSS model, would have been independently associated with survival after controlling for the METSSS model's predictions by using the multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses.
Between the two models, only SORG-MLA achieved adequate discrimination (an AUROC of > 0.7) in the entire cohort (of patients treated operatively or with radiation alone) and in the subgroup of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy alone. SORG-MLA outperformed METSSS by a wide margin on discrimination, calibration, and Brier score analyses in not only the entire cohort but also the subgroup of patients whose local treatment consisted of radiotherapy alone. In both the entire cohort and the subgroup, DCA demonstrated that SORG-MLA provided more net benefit compared with the two default strategies (of treating all or no patients) and compared with METSSS when risk thresholds ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 at both 90 days and 1 year, indicating that using SORG-MLA as a decision-making aid was beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting for treatment was 0.2 to 0.9. Higher albumin, lower alkaline phosphatase, lower calcium, higher hemoglobin, lower international normalized ratio, higher lymphocytes, lower neutrophils, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, higher sodium, and lower white blood cells were independently associated with better 1-year and overall survival after adjusting for the predictions made by METSSS.
Based on these discoveries, clinicians might choose to consult SORG-MLA instead of METSSS for survival estimation in patients with long-bone metastases presenting for evaluation of local treatment. Basing a treatment decision on the predictions of SORG-MLA could be beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting to undergo a particular treatment strategy ranged from 0.2 to 0.9. Future studies might investigate relevant laboratory items when constructing or refining a survival estimation model because these data demonstrated prognostic value independent of the predictions of the METSSS model, and future studies might also seek to keep these models up to date using data from diverse, contemporary patients undergoing both modern operative and nonoperative treatments.
Level III, diagnostic study.
Lee CC
，Chen CW
，Yen HK
，Lin YP
，Lai CY
，Wang JL
，Groot OQ
，Janssen SJ
，Schwab JH
，Hsu FM
，Lin WH
... -
《-》
Genetically proxied glucose-lowering drug target perturbation and risk of cancer: a Mendelian randomisation analysis.
Epidemiological studies have generated conflicting findings on the relationship between glucose-lowering medication use and cancer risk. Naturally occurring variation in genes encoding glucose-lowering drug targets can be used to investigate the effect of their pharmacological perturbation on cancer risk.
We developed genetic instruments for three glucose-lowering drug targets (peroxisome proliferator activated receptor γ [PPARG]; sulfonylurea receptor 1 [ATP binding cassette subfamily C member 8 (ABCC8)]; glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor [GLP1R]) using summary genetic association data from a genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in 148,726 cases and 965,732 controls in the Million Veteran Program. Genetic instruments were constructed using cis-acting genome-wide significant (p<5×10-8) SNPs permitted to be in weak linkage disequilibrium (r2<0.20). Summary genetic association estimates for these SNPs were obtained from genome-wide association study (GWAS) consortia for the following cancers: breast (122,977 cases, 105,974 controls); colorectal (58,221 cases, 67,694 controls); prostate (79,148 cases, 61,106 controls); and overall (i.e. site-combined) cancer (27,483 cases, 372,016 controls). Inverse-variance weighted random-effects models adjusting for linkage disequilibrium were employed to estimate causal associations between genetically proxied drug target perturbation and cancer risk. Co-localisation analysis was employed to examine robustness of findings to violations of Mendelian randomisation (MR) assumptions. A Bonferroni correction was employed as a heuristic to define associations from MR analyses as 'strong' and 'weak' evidence.
In MR analysis, genetically proxied PPARG perturbation was weakly associated with higher risk of prostate cancer (for PPARG perturbation equivalent to a 1 unit decrease in inverse rank normal transformed HbA1c: OR 1.75 [95% CI 1.07, 2.85], p=0.02). In histological subtype-stratified analyses, genetically proxied PPARG perturbation was weakly associated with lower risk of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (OR 0.57 [95% CI 0.38, 0.85], p=6.45×10-3). In co-localisation analysis, however, there was little evidence of shared causal variants for type 2 diabetes liability and cancer endpoints in the PPARG locus, although these analyses were likely underpowered. There was little evidence to support associations between genetically proxied PPARG perturbation and colorectal or overall cancer risk or between genetically proxied ABCC8 or GLP1R perturbation with risk across cancer endpoints.
Our drug target MR analyses did not find consistent evidence to support an association of genetically proxied PPARG, ABCC8 or GLP1R perturbation with breast, colorectal, prostate or overall cancer risk. Further evaluation of these drug targets using alternative molecular epidemiological approaches may help to further corroborate the findings presented in this analysis.
Summary genetic association data for select cancer endpoints were obtained from the public domain: breast cancer ( https://bcac.ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/bcacdata/ ); and overall prostate cancer ( http://practical.icr.ac.uk/blog/ ). Summary genetic association data for colorectal cancer can be accessed by contacting GECCO (kafdem at fredhutch.org). Summary genetic association data on advanced prostate cancer can be accessed by contacting PRACTICAL (practical at icr.ac.uk). Summary genetic association data on type 2 diabetes from Vujkovic et al (Nat Genet, 2020) can be accessed through dbGAP under accession number phs001672.v3.p1 (pha004945.1 refers to the European-specific summary statistics). UK Biobank data can be accessed by registering with UK Biobank and completing the registration form in the Access Management System (AMS) ( https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/enable-your-research/apply-for-access ).
Yarmolinsky J
，Bouras E
，Constantinescu A
，Burrows K
，Bull CJ
，Vincent EE
，Martin RM
，Dimopoulou O
，Lewis SJ
，Moreno V
，Vujkovic M
，Chang KM
，Voight BF
，Tsao PS
，Gunter MJ
，Hampe J
，Pellatt AJ
，Pharoah PDP
，Schoen RE
，Gallinger S
，Jenkins MA
，Pai RK
，PRACTICAL consortium
，VA Million Veteran Program
，Gill D
，Tsilidis KK
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
