Quantifying substantial carcinogenesis of genetic and environmental factors from measurement error in the number of stem cell divisions

• Published in: BMC cancer Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 1 - 1194
• Main Authors: Liu, Xinhui, Yang, Jifeng, Li, Hongkai, Wang, Qing, Yu, Yuanyuan, Sun, Xiaoru, Si, Shucheng, Hou, Lei, Liu, Lu, Yang, Fan, Yan, Ran, Yu, Yifan, Fu, Zhentao, Lu, Zilong, Li, Dejin, Xue, Hao, Guo, Xiaolei, Xue, Fuzhong, Ji, Xiaokang
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central Ltd 19.11.2022; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Analysis; Cancer; Cancer prevention; Carcinogenesis; Cell culture; Cell differentiation; Cell division; Correlation analysis; DNA biosynthesis; DNA replication; Environment; Environmental factors; Epidemiology; Genetic variation; Health aspects; Laboratories; Leukemia; Measurement error; Medulloblastoma; Mutation; Prevention; Progenitor cells; Prostate cancer; Registries (in medicine); Risk factors; Stem cell division; Stem cells; Stochasticity; Technical Advance; Thyroid gland; China
• ISSN: 1471-2407; 1471-2407
• DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10219-w

Background The relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors versus unavoidable stochastic risk factors to the variation in cancer risk among tissues have become a widely-discussed topic. Some claim that the stochastic effects of DNA replication are mainly responsible, others believe that cancer risk is heavily affected by environmental and hereditary factors. Some of these studies made evidence from the correlation analysis between the lifetime number of stem cell divisions within each tissue and tissue-specific lifetime cancer risk. However, they did not consider the measurement error in the estimated number of stem cell divisions, which is caused by the exposure to different levels of genetic and environmental factors. This will obscure the authentic contribution of environmental or inherited factors. Methods In this study, we proposed two distinct modeling strategies, which integrate the measurement error model with the prevailing model of carcinogenesis to quantitatively evaluate the contribution of hereditary and environmental factors to cancer development. Then, we applied the proposed strategies to cancer data from 423 registries in 68 different countries (global-wide), 125 registries across China (national-wide of China), and 139 counties in Shandong province (Shandong provincial, China), respectively. Results The results suggest that the contribution of genetic and environmental factors is at least 92% to the variation in cancer risk among 17 tissues. Moreover, mutations occurring in progenitor cells and differentiated cells are less likely to be accumulated enough for cancer to occur, and the carcinogenesis is more likely to originate from stem cells. Except for medulloblastoma, the contribution of genetic and environmental factors to the risk of other 16 organ-specific cancers are all more than 60%. Conclusions This work provides additional evidence that genetic and environmental factors play leading roles in cancer development. Therefore, the identification of modifiable environmental and hereditary risk factors for each cancer is highly recommended, and primary prevention in early life-course should be the major focus of cancer prevention. Keywords: Cancer prevention, Environment, Stem cell division, Measurement error, Epidemiology