Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Native American ancestry and breast cancer risk in Colombian and Mexican women: ruling out potential confounding through ancestry-informative markers
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Native American ancestry and breast cancer risk in Colombian and Mexican women: ruling out potential confounding through ancestry-informative markers
Do you wish to request the book?
Native American ancestry and breast cancer risk in Colombian and Mexican women: ruling out potential confounding through ancestry-informative markers
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Native American ancestry and breast cancer risk in Colombian and Mexican women: ruling out potential confounding through ancestry-informative markers
2023
Overview
Background
Latin American and Hispanic women are less likely to develop breast cancer (BC) than women of European descent. Observational studies have found an inverse relationship between the individual proportion of Native American ancestry and BC risk. Here, we use ancestry-informative markers to rule out potential confounding of this relationship, estimating the confounder-free effect of Native American ancestry on BC risk.
Methods and study population
We used the informativeness for assignment measure to select robust instrumental variables for the individual proportion of Native American ancestry. We then conducted separate Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses based on 1401 Colombian women, most of them from the central Andean regions of Cundinamarca and Huila, and 1366 Mexican women from Mexico City, Monterrey and Veracruz, supplemented by sensitivity and stratified analyses.
Results
The proportion of Colombian Native American ancestry showed a putatively causal protective effect on BC risk (inverse variance-weighted odds ratio [OR] = 0.974 per 1% increase in ancestry proportion, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.970–0.978,
p
= 3.1 × 10
–40
). The corresponding OR for Mexican Native American ancestry was 0.988 (95% CI 0.987–0.990,
p
= 1.4 × 10
–44
). Stratified analyses revealed a stronger association between Native American ancestry and familial BC (Colombian women: OR = 0.958, 95% CI 0.952–0.964; Mexican women: OR = 0.973, 95% CI 0.969–0.978), and stronger protective effects on oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive BC than on ER-negative and triple-negative BC.
Conclusions
The present results point to an unconfounded protective effect of Native American ancestry on BC risk in both Colombian and Mexican women which appears to be stronger for familial and ER-positive BC. These findings provide a rationale for personalised prevention programmes that take genetic ancestry into account, as well as for future admixture mapping studies.
