Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 30, 2025

Generation of High Quality Chromatin Immunoprecipitation DNA Template for High-throughput Sequencing ChIP-seq
Published on: April 19, 2013
Genetically proxied glucose-lowering drug target perturbation and risk of cancer: a Mendelian randomisation analysis
James Yarmolinsky1,2, Emmanouil Bouras3, Andrei Constantinescu4,5
1MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. james.yarmolinsky@bristol.ac.uk.
Aims/Hypothesis:
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.
Methods:
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.
Results:
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.
Conclusions/Interpretation:
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.
Data Availability:
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 ).
Insights
This study used genetic data to investigate if altering drug targets for type 2 diabetes affects cancer risk. No consistent associations were found between genetically proxied drug target perturbation and breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer risk.
Area of Science:
- Genetics and Epidemiology
- Pharmacogenomics
- Cancer Research
Background:
- Conflicting findings exist regarding glucose-lowering medication use and cancer risk.
- Naturally occurring genetic variations in drug targets can model pharmacological effects.
- Investigating genetic variants of drug targets offers insights into drug-induced cancer risk.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the causal effect of perturbing glucose-lowering drug targets on cancer risk using Mendelian randomization (MR).
- To assess the association between genetic proxies for peroxisome proliferator activated receptor γ (PPARG), sulfonylurea receptor 1 (ABCC8), and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP1R) perturbation and cancer risk.
Main Methods:
- Developed genetic instruments for PPARG, ABCC8, and GLP1R using genome-wide association study (GWAS) data for type 2 diabetes.
- Utilized summary genetic association data from large GWAS consortia for breast, colorectal, prostate, and overall cancer.
- Employed inverse-variance weighted MR and co-localization analyses to estimate causal associations and assess robustness.
Main Results:
- Weak association observed between genetically proxied PPARG perturbation and increased prostate cancer risk (OR 1.75, p=0.02).
- Weak association found between genetically proxied PPARG perturbation and decreased oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer risk (OR 0.57, p=6.45×10-3).
- Limited evidence for shared causal variants at the PPARG locus; no significant associations for ABCC8 or GLP1R perturbation with cancer risk.
Conclusions:
- MR analyses did not provide consistent evidence for a causal link between genetically proxied PPARG, ABCC8, or GLP1R perturbation and major cancer risks.
- Co-localization analyses suggested potential limitations due to statistical power.
- Further research using alternative molecular epidemiological approaches is recommended to validate these findings.
More Related Videos
09:33Author Spotlight: Finding New Therapeutic Targets for Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumor Through Genome-Scale shRNA Screens
Published on: August 25, 2023
05:53Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
Published on: June 21, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...