A combined genomewide linkage scan of 1,233 families for prostate cancer-susceptibility genes conducted by the international consortium for prostate cancer genetics.

Evidence of the existence of major prostate cancer (PC)-susceptibility genes has been provided by multiple segregation analyses. Although genomewide screens have been performed in over a dozen independent studies, few chromosomal regions have been consistently identified as regions of interest. One of the major difficulties is genetic heterogeneity, possibly due to multiple, incompletely penetrant PC-susceptibility genes. In this study, we explored two approaches to overcome this difficulty, in an analysis of a large number of families with PC in the International Consortium for Prostate Cancer Genetics (ICPCG). One approach was to combine linkage data from a total of 1,233 families to increase the statistical power for detecting linkage. Using parametric (dominant and recessive) and nonparametric analyses, we identified five regions with "suggestive" linkage (LOD score >1.86): 5q12, 8p21, 15q11, 17q21, and 22q12. The second approach was to focus on subsets of families that are more likely to segregate highly penetrant mutations, including families with large numbers of affected individuals or early age at diagnosis. Stronger evidence of linkage in several regions was identified, including a "significant" linkage at 22q12, with a LOD score of 3.57, and five suggestive linkages (1q25, 8q13, 13q14, 16p13, and 17q21) in 269 families with at least five affected members. In addition, four additional suggestive linkages (3p24, 5q35, 11q22, and Xq12) were found in 606 families with mean age at diagnosis of < or = 65 years. Although it is difficult to determine the true statistical significance of these findings, a conservative interpretation of these results would be that if major PC-susceptibility genes do exist, they are most likely located in the regions generating suggestive or significant linkage signals in this large study.

Combined genome-wide scan for prostate cancer susceptibility genes.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer represents a substantial public health burden worldwide. It is the second leading cause of cancer death among men in the United States. A family history of the disease is among the most well-established risk factors for prostate cancer. Efforts to localize prostate cancer susceptibility alleles by using genetic linkage analysis methods have been hindered by genetic heterogeneity, incomplete penetrance, disease phenocopies, and the lack of DNA samples from parents of individuals with late-onset prostate cancer. METHODS: We performed a combined genome-wide linkage analysis among 426 families from four existing hereditary prostate cancer (HPC) study populations to systematically search for prostate cancer susceptibility genes. To decrease the degree of locus heterogeneity, we analyzed subsets of families with similar clinical and demographic characteristics. Nonparametric multipoint linkage was the primary method of analysis. Results are presented as allele-sharing logarithm of the odds (LOD) scores, and all reported P values are two-sided. RESULTS: The strongest evidence for prostate cancer linkage was found at chromosome region 17q22 (nonparametric multipoint Kong and Cox allele-sharing LOD score = 3.16 at marker D17S787; P =.00007). Stratified analyses revealed several additional chromosomal regions that are likely to segregate prostate cancer susceptibility genes among specific subsets of HPC families, including 15q11 among families with late-onset disease (allele-sharing LOD = 5.57 at marker D15S128; P<.00001) and 4q35 among families with four or more affected family members (allele-sharing LOD = 3.10 at marker D4S1615; P =.00008). CONCLUSION: Fine mapping studies to facilitate identification of prostate cancer susceptibility genes in these linked regions are warranted.

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in men with family history of prostate cancer: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) among men with a family history of prostate cancer and to evaluate the relationship between selected sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and the use of CAMs. METHODS: Unaffected brothers of men diagnosed with prostate cancer were asked to participate in a short computer-assisted telephone interview. The survey focused primarily on the use of different vitamins, herbal supplements, and medications, some of which are marketed for prostate health or prostate cancer prevention. RESULTS: A total of 111 men completed the survey, representing 66% of eligible study subjects. Of the 111 men, 61 (55%) reported currently taking some form of CAM, with 30% taking a vitamin or supplement purported to have prostate-specific benefits. The prevalence of CAM use generally increased with increasing age; however, men who were younger than their affected brother at the time of the diagnosis of prostate cancer were more likely to use CAMs than were older brothers. CONCLUSIONS: Most men with a family history of prostate cancer take vitamins and supplements, some of which are believed to prevent future cancer occurrence. The results of this study and others provide some insight into the determinants of potentially beneficial health behaviors in high-risk individuals.