Abstract
A polygenic approach to disease prevention has become a realistic goal that has arisen from the sequencing of the human genome. Some believe it will be possible to identify individuals as susceptible by their genotype and to prevent disease by targeting interventions to those at risk. However, doubts have been expressed about the magnitude of these genetic effects, and hence the potential to apply them either to individuals or to populations. Published data suggest that the familial aggregation of breast cancer not due to the known high penetrance genes is polygenic, which implies that the distribution of risk in the population is continuous. This model is likely to apply to other common cancers. The utility of a continuous distribution for identifying a high-risk group of the population for targeted preventive intervention depends on the spread of that risk distribution. For breast cancer, the data are compatible with a log-normal distribution of genetic risk in the population which is sufficiently wide to provide useful discrimination of high- and low-risk groups. Assuming all the susceptibility genes could be identified, the half of the population at highest risk would account for 88% of all cases. In contrast, if currently identified risk factors for breast cancer were used to stratify the population, the half of the population at highest risk would account for only 62% of all cases. These results suggest that in the future the construction and use of genetic risk profiles may provide significant improvements in the efficacy of population-based programmes of intervention for cancers and other diseases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anglian Breast Cancer Study Group (2000) Prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in a population based series of breast cancer cases. Br J Cancer 83:1301–1308
Antoniou AC, Pharoah PDP, McMullen G, Day NE, Ponder BAJ, Easton DF (2001) Evidence for further breast cancer susceptibility genes in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2 in a population based study. Genet EpidemioI 21:1–18
Antoniou AC, Pharoah PDP, McMullen G, Day NE, Stratton MR, Peto J, Ponder BAJ, Easton DF (2001) A comprehensive model for familial breast cancer incorporating BRCA1, BRCA2 and other genes. Br J Cancer (in press)
Beaudet AL (1999) 1998 ASHG presidential address. Making genomic medicine a reality. Am J Hum Genet 64:1–13
Bell J (1998) The new genetics in clinical practice. Br Med J 316:618–620
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (2001) Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 358:1389–1399
Cui J, Antoniou AC, Dite GS, Southey MC, Venter DJ, Easton DF, Giles GG, McCredie MR, Hopper JL (2001) After BRCA1 and BRCA2-whatnext? Multifactorial segregation analyses of three-generation, population-based Australian families affected by female breast cancer. Am J Hum Genet 68:420–431
Dunning AM, Healey CS, Pharoah PDP, Teare DM, Ponder BAJ, Easton DF (1999) A systematic review of genetic polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8:843–854
Easton DF (1999) How many more breast cancer predisposition genes are there. Breast Cancer Res 1:14–17
Friend SH (1999) How DNA microarrays and expression profiling will affect clinical practice. Br Med J 319:1306–1307
Holtzman NA, Marteau TM (2000) Will genetics revolutionize medicine? N Engl J Med 343:141–144
Kelsey JL, Gammon MD, John EM (1993) Reproductive factors and breast cancer. Epidemiol Rev 15:36–47
Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrock C, Ernster VL (1995) Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. JAMA 273:149–154
Lichtenstein P, Holm NV, Verkasalo PK, Iliadou A, Kaprio J, Koskenvuo M, Pukkala E, Skytthe A, Hemminki K (2000) Environmental and heritable factors in the causation of cancer-analyses of cohorts of twins from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. N Engl J Med 343:78–85
Peto J, Mack TM (2000) High constant incidence in twins and other relatives of women with breast cancer. Nat Genet 26:411–414
Pharoah PDP, Antoniou A, Bobrow M, Zimmern RL, Ponder BAJ, Easton DF (2002) Polygenic susceptibility to breast cancer: implications for prevention. Nature Genet (in press)
Pharoah PDP, Day NE, Duffy S, Easton DF, Ponder BAJ (1997) Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 71:800–809
Pharoah PDP, Mackay J (1998) Absolute risk of breast cancer in women at increased risk: a more useful clinical measure than relative risk? Breast J 7:255–259
Risch N (2001) The genetic epidemiology of cancer: interpreting family and twin studies and their implications for molecular genetic approaches. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:733–741
Rose G (1985) Sick individuals and sick populations. Int J Epidemiol 14:32–38
Vaittinen P, Hemminki K (2000) Risk factors arid age-incidence relationships for contralateral breast cancer. Int J Cancer 88:998–1002
Vineis P, Schulte P, McMichael AJ (2001) Misconceptions about the use of genetic tests in populations. Lancet 357:709–712
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pharoah, P.D.P. (2003). Genetic Susceptibility, Predicting Risk and Preventing Cancer. In: Senn, HJ., Morant, R. (eds) Tumor Prevention and Genetics. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 163. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55647-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55647-0_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-62892-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-55647-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive