Austin Hammermeister Suger, Tabitha A Harrison, Barbara Henning, Constance Turman, Peter Kraft, Sara Lindström
{"title":"Nonadditive Effects of Common Genetic Variants Have a Negligent Contribution to Cancer Heritability.","authors":"Austin Hammermeister Suger, Tabitha A Harrison, Barbara Henning, Constance Turman, Peter Kraft, Sara Lindström","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contribution of dominance effects to cancer heritability is unknown. We leveraged existing genome-wide association data for seven cancers to estimate the contribution of dominance effects to the heritability of individual cancer types.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We estimated the proportion of phenotypic variation caused by dominance genetic effects using genome-wide association data for seven cancers (breast, colorectal, lung, melanoma, nonmelanoma skin, ovarian, and prostate) in a total of 166,772 cases and 284,824 controls.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed no evidence of a meaningful contribution of dominance effects to cancer heritability. By contrast, additive effects ranged between 0.11 and 0.34.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In line with studies of other human traits, the dominance effects of common genetic variants play a minimal role in cancer etiology.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>These results support the assumption of an additive inheritance model when conducting cancer association studies with common genetic variants.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446654/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0496","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Contribution of dominance effects to cancer heritability is unknown. We leveraged existing genome-wide association data for seven cancers to estimate the contribution of dominance effects to the heritability of individual cancer types.
Methods: We estimated the proportion of phenotypic variation caused by dominance genetic effects using genome-wide association data for seven cancers (breast, colorectal, lung, melanoma, nonmelanoma skin, ovarian, and prostate) in a total of 166,772 cases and 284,824 controls.
Results: We observed no evidence of a meaningful contribution of dominance effects to cancer heritability. By contrast, additive effects ranged between 0.11 and 0.34.
Conclusions: In line with studies of other human traits, the dominance effects of common genetic variants play a minimal role in cancer etiology.
Impact: These results support the assumption of an additive inheritance model when conducting cancer association studies with common genetic variants.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.