Risk-modeling of dog osteosarcoma genome scans shows individuals with Mendelian-level polygenic risk are common.
Animals
Bone Neoplasms
/ genetics
Breeding
Case-Control Studies
Cohort Studies
Disease Models, Animal
Dog Diseases
/ genetics
Dogs
Genetic Predisposition to Disease
Genome
Genome-Wide Association Study
Genomics
/ methods
Models, Statistical
Multifactorial Inheritance
Osteosarcoma
/ genetics
Risk Assessment
/ methods
AQP4
BMPER
BRINP3
Breed
CDKN2A
CDKN2B
Canine
EWSR1
FBRSL1
FGF9
IGF1
Intersection union test
LASSO
Logistic regression modeling
MARCO
MIR100HG
MTMR7
MTMR9
NELL1
OTX2
Osteosarcoma
Retrogene
SVIL
Stepwise
TANGO2
Journal
BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Mar 2019
19 Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
13
09
2018
accepted:
13
02
2019
entrez:
21
3
2019
pubmed:
21
3
2019
medline:
23
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Despite the tremendous therapeutic advances that have stemmed from somatic oncogenetics, survival of some cancers has not improved in 50 years. Osteosarcoma still has a 5-year survival rate of 66%. We propose the natural canine osteosarcoma model can change that: it is extremely similar to the human condition, except for being highly heritable and having a dramatically higher incidence. Here we reanalyze published genome scans of osteosarcoma in three frequently-affected dog breeds and report entirely new understandings with immediate translational indications. First, meta-analysis revealed association near FGF9, which has strong biological and therapeutic relevance. Secondly, risk-modeling by multiple logistic regression shows 22 of the 34 associated loci contribute to risk and eight have large effect sizes. We validated the Greyhound stepwise model in our own, independent, case-control cohort. Lastly, we updated the gene annotation from approximately 50 genes to 175, and prioritized those using cross-species genomics data. Mostly positional evidence suggests 13 genes are likely to be associated with mapped risk (including MTMR9, EWSR1 retrogene, TANGO2 and FGF9). Previous annotation included seven of those 13 and prioritized four by pathway enrichment. Ten of our 13 priority genes are in loci that contribute to risk modeling and thus can be studied epidemiologically and translationally in pet dogs. Other new candidates include MYCN, SVIL and MIR100HG. Polygenic osteosarcoma-risk commonly rises to Mendelian-levels in some dog breeds. This justifies caninized animal models and targeted clinical trials in pet dogs (e.g., using CDK4/6 and FGFR1/2 inhibitors).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Despite the tremendous therapeutic advances that have stemmed from somatic oncogenetics, survival of some cancers has not improved in 50 years. Osteosarcoma still has a 5-year survival rate of 66%. We propose the natural canine osteosarcoma model can change that: it is extremely similar to the human condition, except for being highly heritable and having a dramatically higher incidence. Here we reanalyze published genome scans of osteosarcoma in three frequently-affected dog breeds and report entirely new understandings with immediate translational indications.
RESULTS
RESULTS
First, meta-analysis revealed association near FGF9, which has strong biological and therapeutic relevance. Secondly, risk-modeling by multiple logistic regression shows 22 of the 34 associated loci contribute to risk and eight have large effect sizes. We validated the Greyhound stepwise model in our own, independent, case-control cohort. Lastly, we updated the gene annotation from approximately 50 genes to 175, and prioritized those using cross-species genomics data. Mostly positional evidence suggests 13 genes are likely to be associated with mapped risk (including MTMR9, EWSR1 retrogene, TANGO2 and FGF9). Previous annotation included seven of those 13 and prioritized four by pathway enrichment. Ten of our 13 priority genes are in loci that contribute to risk modeling and thus can be studied epidemiologically and translationally in pet dogs. Other new candidates include MYCN, SVIL and MIR100HG.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Polygenic osteosarcoma-risk commonly rises to Mendelian-levels in some dog breeds. This justifies caninized animal models and targeted clinical trials in pet dogs (e.g., using CDK4/6 and FGFR1/2 inhibitors).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30890123
doi: 10.1186/s12864-019-5531-6
pii: 10.1186/s12864-019-5531-6
pmc: PMC6425649
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
226Subventions
Organisme : Stanton Foundation
ID : Next Gen Fellowship
Organisme : American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation
ID : 01660
Organisme : Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
ID : W81XWH-11-2-0224
Organisme : Morris Animal Foundation
ID : D13CA-073
Organisme : XXI University of Cordoba Intramural research Program
ID : Postdoctoral fellowship
Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Aug 19;100(17):9768-73
pubmed: 12890864
Nat Rev Genet. 2006 Jan;7(1):55-65
pubmed: 16369572
Science. 2007 Apr 6;316(5821):112-5
pubmed: 17412960
Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep;81(3):559-75
pubmed: 17701901
Ann Oncol. 2009 Jun;20(6):1136-41
pubmed: 19153114
Chromosome Res. 2009;17(3):365-377
pubmed: 19337847
Cell Signal. 2009 Sep;21(9):1370-8
pubmed: 19410646
BMC Genet. 2009 May 27;10:23
pubmed: 19473544
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jun 29;107(26):11853-8
pubmed: 20547837
PLoS Genet. 2011 Mar;7(3):e1001332
pubmed: 21437276
Trends Mol Med. 2011 Jul;17(7):380-8
pubmed: 21439907
Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2011 Nov;50(11):859-74
pubmed: 21837709
PLoS Genet. 2011 Oct;7(10):e1002316
pubmed: 22022279
Genetics. 2013 Mar;193(3):1003-13
pubmed: 23288936
Nat Genet. 2013 Jul;45(7):799-803
pubmed: 23727862
J Histochem Cytochem. 2013 Sep;61(9):671-9
pubmed: 23797050
Genome Biol. 2013 Dec 12;14(12):R132
pubmed: 24330828
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 13;9(3):e91172
pubmed: 24625832
Cancer Med. 2014 Aug;3(4):980-7
pubmed: 24861215
ILAR J. 2014;55(1):16-45
pubmed: 24936028
ILAR J. 2014;55(1):69-85
pubmed: 24936031
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 23;111(51):E5564-73
pubmed: 25512523
Genet Med. 2015 May;17(5):405-24
pubmed: 25741868
Nat Genet. 2015 Jun;47(6):615-24
pubmed: 25961939
Endocr Rev. 2015 Dec;36(6):646-80
pubmed: 26485225
Nat Commun. 2016 Jan 22;7:10460
pubmed: 26795439
Cell Rep. 2016 Mar 15;14(10):2490-501
pubmed: 26947069
Development. 2016 May 15;143(10):1811-22
pubmed: 27052727
Cell Rep. 2016 May 31;15(9):2000-11
pubmed: 27210762
J Comp Pathol. 2016 Aug-Oct;155(2-3):156-170
pubmed: 27406312
Cancer Biol Med. 2016 Jun;13(2):260-8
pubmed: 27458533
BMC Genomics. 2016 Aug 08;17:572
pubmed: 27503363
Genome Med. 2016 Sep 08;8(1):93
pubmed: 27609221
Oncotarget. 2017 Jan 3;8(1):1495-1507
pubmed: 27902461
BMC Genomics. 2017 Feb 8;18(1):141
pubmed: 28178945
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Jul 6;101(1):5-22
pubmed: 28686856
Nat Rev Genet. 2017 Dec;18(12):705-720
pubmed: 28944780
Acta Vet Scand. 2017 Oct 24;59(1):71
pubmed: 29065898
Nat Commun. 2017 Oct 26;8(1):1136
pubmed: 29070816
Int J Cancer. 2018 Apr 15;142(8):1594-1601
pubmed: 29210060
J Cell Biochem. 2018 Jun;119(6):4241-4250
pubmed: 29236321
Cancer Res. 2018 Jul 1;78(13):3421-3431
pubmed: 29724721
Cancer Lett. 2018 Aug 28;430:123-132
pubmed: 29729292
Cancer Cell. 2018 Jul 9;34(1):9-20
pubmed: 29731395
Am J Hum Genet. 2018 Jun 7;102(6):1048-1061
pubmed: 29779563
Nat Rev Genet. 2018 Sep;19(9):581-590
pubmed: 29789686
Oncogene. 2019 Jan;38(2):291-298
pubmed: 30093633
Vet J. 1998 Jul;156(1):31-9
pubmed: 9691849