4.5 Article

The OncoArray Consortium: A Network for Understanding the Genetic Architecture of Common Cancers

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 126-135

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0106

关键词

-

资金

  1. TRICL (Transdisciplinary Research for Cancer of Lung)
  2. International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) by NIH [U19 CA148127-01]
  3. NIH [U19 CA148065, U19 CA148107, R01 CA81488, P30 CA014089, U19-CA148112]
  4. Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute [020214, R01-CA122443, P50-CA116201, CA192393, P50-CA136393, OCAC-CA- 149429, P30-CA15083, R01 CA 136924, R01 CA 190182]
  5. Cancer Research UK [C490/A8339, C1287/A16563, C1287/A10118, C490/A16561, C490/A10119, C490/A10124]
  6. Hospital Clinical Research Program (PHRC)
  7. Regional Council of Pays de la Loire
  8. Groupement des Entreprises Francaises dans la Lutte contre le Cancer (GEFLUC)
  9. Association Anne de Bretagne Genetique
  10. Ligue Regionale Contre le Cancer (LRCC)
  11. German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) [BR 1704/6-1, BR 1704/6-3, BR 1704/6-4, CH 117/1-1]
  12. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [01KH0404, 01ER0814]
  13. Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS
  14. German Cancer Aid [110837]
  15. Government of Canada through Genome Canada
  16. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-86727]
  17. Ministere de l'Economie, Innovation et Exportation du Quebec through Genome Quebec
  18. Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation
  19. Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation
  20. National Cancer Institute through Breast Cancer Family Registry Cohort [1UM1CA164920-01A1]
  21. European Union [MSCA-IF-2014-EF-656144]
  22. Breast Cancer Research Foundation [P30 CA08748]
  23. Andrew Sabin Foundation
  24. Norris Cotton Cancer Center [P30CA023108]
  25. Quantitative Biology Research Institute [P20GM103534]
  26. Coordinating Center for Screen Detected Lesions [U01CA196386]
  27. [U19 CA148537]
  28. [268201200008I]
  29. [1X01HG007491-01]
  30. Cancer Research UK [15007, 16561, 23382, 16565, 20861, 10118, 12677, 11174, 17528] Funding Source: researchfish
  31. Cancer Research UK
  32. The Francis Crick Institute [10124] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Common cancers develop through a multistep process often including inherited susceptibility. Collaboration among multiple institutions, and funding from multiple sources, has allowed the development of an inexpensive genotyping microarray, the OncoArray. The array includes a genome-wide backbone, comprising 230,000 SNPs tagging most common genetic variants, together with dense mapping of known susceptibility regions, rare variants from sequencing experiments, pharmacogenetic markers, and cancer-related traits. Methods: The OncoArray can be genotyped using a novel technology developed by Illumina to facilitate efficient genotyping. The consortium developed standard approaches for selecting SNPs for study, for quality control of markers, and for ancestry analysis. The array was genotyped at selected sites and with prespecified replicate samples to permit evaluation of genotyping accuracy among centers and by ethnic background. Results: The OncoArray consortium genotyped 447,705 samples. A total of 494,763 SNPs passed quality control steps with a sample success rate of 97% of the samples. Participating sites performed ancestry analysis using a common set of markers and a scoring algorithm based on principal components analysis. Conclusions: Results from these analyses will enable researchers to identify new susceptibility loci, perform fine-mapping of new or known loci associated with either single or multiple cancers, assess the degree of overlap in cancer causation and pleiotropic effects of loci that have been identified for disease-specific risk, and jointly model genetic, environmental, and lifestyle-related exposures. Impact: Ongoing analyses will shed light on etiology and risk assessment for many types of cancer. (C)2016 AACR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据