TY - JOUR T1 - Assessing the causal role of epigenetic clocks in the development of multiple cancers: a Mendelian randomization study JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.11.29.21266984 SP - 2021.11.29.21266984 AU - Fernanda Morales-Berstein AU - Daniel L McCartney AU - Ake T Lu AU - Konstantinos K Tsilidis AU - Emmanouil Bouras AU - Philip Haycock AU - Kimberley Burrows AU - Amanda I Phipps AU - Daniel D Buchanan AU - Iona Cheng AU - the PRACTICAL consortium AU - Richard M Martin AU - George Davey Smith AU - Caroline L Relton AU - Steve Horvath AU - Riccardo E Marioni AU - Tom G Richardson AU - Rebecca C Richmond Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/07/2021.11.29.21266984.abstract N2 - Background Epigenetic clocks have been associated with cancer risk in several observational studies. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether they play a causal role in cancer risk or if they act as a non-causal biomarker.Methods We conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to examine the genetically predicted effects of epigenetic age acceleration as measured by HannumAge (9 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)), Horvath Intrinsic Age (24 SNPs), PhenoAge (11 SNPs) and GrimAge (4 SNPs) on multiple cancers (i.e., breast, prostate, colorectal, ovarian and lung cancer). We obtained genome-wide association data for biological ageing from a meta-analysis (N=34,710), and for cancer from the UK Biobank (N cases=2,671–13,879; N controls=173,493–372,016), FinnGen (N cases=719–8,401; N controls=74,685–174,006) and several international cancer genetic consortia (N cases=11,348–122,977; N controls=15,861–105,974). Main analyses were performed using multiplicative random effects inverse variance weighted (IVW) MR. Individual study estimates were pooled using fixed effect meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses included MR-Egger, weighted median, weighted mode and Causal Analysis using Summary Effect Estimates (CAUSE) methods, which are robust to some of the assumptions of the IVW approach.Results Meta-analysed IVW MR findings suggested that higher GrimAge acceleration increased the risk of colorectal cancer (OR=1.12 per year increase in GrimAge acceleration, 95%CI 1.04–1.20, p=0.002). The direction of the genetically predicted effects was consistent across main and sensitivity MR analyses. Among subtypes, the genetically predicted effect of GrimAge acceleration was greater for colon cancer (IVW OR=1.15, 95%CI 1.09–1.21, p=0.006), than rectal cancer (IVW OR=1.05, 95%CI 0.97–1.13, p=0.24). We also found evidence that higher GrimAge acceleration decreased the risk of prostate cancer (pooled IVW OR=0.93 per year increase in GrimAge acceleration, 95%CI 0.87–0.99, p=0.02). This was supported by MR sensitivity analyses, but did not replicate in MR analyses using data on parental history of prostate cancer in UK Biobank (IVW OR=1.00, 95%CI 0.96–1.04, p=1.00). Results were less consistent for associations between other epigenetic clocks and cancers.Conclusions GrimAge acceleration may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Additionally, there is more limited evidence that it may be protective against prostate cancer. Findings for other clocks and cancers were inconsistent. Further work is required to investigate the potential mechanisms underlying the results.Funding FMB was supported by a Wellcome Trust PhD studentship in Molecular, Genetic and Lifecourse Epidemiology (218495/Z/19/Z). KKT was supported by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme) and by the Hellenic Republic’s Operational Programme “Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship & Innovation” (OΠΣ 5047228). PH was supported by Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019).RMM was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. GDS and CLR were supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/5) and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). REM was supported by an Alzheimer’s Society project grant (AS-PG-19b-010) and NIH grant (U01 AG-18-018, PI: Steve Horvath). RCR is a de Pass Vice Chancellor’s Research Fellow at the University of Bristol.Competing Interest StatementTGR is employed part time by Novo Nordisk outside of this work. REM has received a speaker fee from Illumina and is an advisor to the Epigenetic Clock Development Foundation. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.Clinical TrialThis is a Mendelian randomization study, not a clinical trial.Funding StatementRMM was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. GDS and CLR were supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/5) and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). FMB was supported by a Wellcome Trust PhD studentship in Molecular, Genetic and Lifecourse Epidemiology (218495/Z/19/Z). RCR is a de Pass Vice Chancellor's Research Fellow at the University of Bristol. KKT was supported by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme) and by the Hellenic Republic's Operational Programme "Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship & Innovation" (O?? 5047228). PH was supported by Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019). REM was supported by an Alzheimer's Society project grant (AS-PG-19b-010) and NIH grant (U01 AG-18-018, PI: Steve Horvath).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.Not ApplicableThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Not applicable.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.Not ApplicableI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Not Applicable I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.Not ApplicableSummary statistics for epigenetic age acceleration measures of HannumAge, Intrinsic HorvathAge, PhenoAge and GrimAge were downloaded from: https://datashare.ed.ac.uk/handle/10283/3645. Summary statistics for international cancer genetic consortiums were obtained from their respective data repositories. Colorectal cancer data were obtained following the submission of a written request to the GECCO committee, which may be contacted by email at kafdem{at}fredhutch.org/upeters{at}fredhutch.org. Breast, ovarian, prostate and lung cancer data were accessed via MR-Base (http://app.mrbase.org/), which holds complete GWAS summary data from BCAC, OCAC, PRACTICAL and ILCCO. Breast cancer subtype data were obtained from BCAC and can be downloaded from: http://bcac.ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/bcacdata/oncoarray/oncoarray-and-combined-summary-result/gwas-summary-associations-breast-cancer-risk-2020/. Data on breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers were obtained from CIMBA and can be downloaded from: http://cimba.ccge.medschl.cam.ac.uk/oncoarray-complete-summary-results/. Prostate cancer subtype data are not publicly available through MR-Base but can be accessed upon request. These data are managed by the PRACTICAL committee, which may be contacted by email at practical{at}icr.ac.uk. FinnGen data is publicly available and can be accessed here: https://www.finngen.fi/en/access_results. UK Biobank data can be accessed through the MR-Base platform. Parental history of cancer data were obtained from the UK Biobank study under application #15825 and can be accessed via an approved application to the UK Biobank (https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/enable-your-research/apply-for-access). ER -