The quagmire of race, genetic ancestry, and health disparities.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sirugo G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8159696 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The quagmire of race, genetic ancestry, and health disparities.
Sirugo Giorgio G Tishkoff Sarah A SA Williams Scott M SM
The Journal of clinical investigation 20210601 11
Similar Datasets
Project description:Research to understand human genomic variation and its implications in health has great potential to contribute in the reduction of health disparities. Biological anthropology can play important roles in genomics and health disparities research using a biocultural approach. This paper argues that racial/ethnic categories should not be used as a surrogate for sociocultural factors or global genomic clusters in biomedical research or clinical settings, because of the high genetic heterogeneity that exists within traditional racial/ethnic groups. Genetic ancestry is used to show variation in ancestral genomic contributions to recently admixed populations in the United States, such as African Americans and Hispanic/Latino Americans. Genetic ancestry estimates are also used to examine the relationship between ancestry-related biological and sociocultural factors affecting health disparities. To localize areas of genomes that contribute to health disparities, admixture mapping and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are often used. Recent GWAS have identified many genetic variants that are highly differentiated among human populations that are associated with disease risk. Some of these are population-specific variants. Many of these variants may impact disease risk and help explain a portion of the difference in disease burden among racial/ethnic groups. Genetic ancestry is also of particular interest in precision medicine and disparities in drug efficacy and outcomes. By using genetic ancestry, we can learn about potential biological differences that may contribute to the heterogeneity observed across self-reported racial groups.
| S-EPMC8246846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Breast cancer health disparities are linked to clinical-pathological determinants, socioeconomic inequities, and biological factors such as genetic ancestry. These factors collectively interact in complex ways, influencing disease behavior, especially among highly admixed populations like Colombians. In this study, we assessed contributing factors to breast cancer health disparities according to genetic ancestry in Colombian patients from a national cancer reference center. We collected non-tumoral paraffin embedded (FFPE) blocks from 361 women diagnosed with breast cancer at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) to estimate genetic ancestry using a 106-ancestry informative marker (AIM) panel. Differences in European, Indigenous American (IA) and African ancestry fractions were analyzed according to potential sources of breast cancer health disparities, like etiology, tumor-biology, treatment administration, and socioeconomic-related factors using a Kruskal-Wallis test. Our analysis revealed a significantly higher IA ancestry among overweight patients with larger tumors and those covered by a subsidized health insurance. Conversely, we found a significantly higher European ancestry among patients with smaller tumors, residing in middle-income households, and affiliated to the contributory health regime, whereas a higher median of African ancestry was observed among patients with either a clinical, pathological, or stable response to neoadjuvant treatment. Altogether, our results suggest that the genetic legacy among Colombian patients, measured as genetic ancestry fractions, may be reflected in many of the clinical-pathological variables and socioeconomic factors that end up contributing to health disparities for this disease.
| S-EPMC11210782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Race, ethnicity, and ancestry are common classification variables used in health research. However, there has been no formal agreement on the definitions of these terms, resulting in misuse, confusion, and a lack of clarity surrounding these concepts for researchers and their readers. This article examines past and current understandings of race, ethnicity, and ancestry in research, identifies the distinctions between these terms, examines the reliability of these terms, and provides researchers with guidance on how to use these terms. Although race, ethnicity, and ancestry are often treated synonymously, they should be considered as distinct terms in the context of health research. Researchers should carefully consider which term is most appropriate for their study, define and use the terms consistently, and consider how their classification may be used in future research by others. The classification should be self-reported rather than assigned by an observer wherever possible.
| S-EPMC10022242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Study revealed poorer antidepressant treatment response among black compared with white participants. This racial disparity persisted even after socioeconomic and baseline clinical factors were taken into account. Some studies have suggested genetic contributions to this disparity, but none have attempted to disentangle race and genetic ancestry. Here we used genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data to examine independent contributions of race and genetic ancestry to citalopram response. Secondary data analyses included 1877 STAR*D participants who completed an average of 10 weeks of citalopram treatment and provided DNA samples. Participants reported their race as White (n=1464), black (n=299) or other/mixed (n=114). Genetic ancestry was estimated by multidimensional scaling (MDS) analyses of about 500 000 SNPs. Ancestry proportions were estimated by STRUCTURE. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the direct and indirect effects of observed and latent predictors of response, defined as change in the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) score from baseline to exit. Socioeconomic and baseline clinical factors, race, and anxiety significantly predicted response, as previously reported. However, direct effects of race disappeared in all models that included genetic ancestry. Genetic African ancestry predicted lower treatment response in all models. Although socioeconomic and baseline clinical factors drive racial differences in antidepressant response, genetic ancestry, rather than self-reported race, explains a significant fraction of the residual differences. Larger samples would be needed to identify the specific genetic mechanisms that may be involved, but these findings underscore the importance of including more African-American patients in drug trials.
| S-EPMC3828530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany allergic conditions occur more frequently in African American patients when compared with white patients; however, it is not known whether this represents genetic predisposition or disparate environmental exposures.ObjectiveWe sought to assess the relationship of self-reported race and genetic ancestry to allergic sensitization.MethodsWe included 601 women enrolled in a population-based cohort study whose self-reported race was African American or white. Genetic ancestry was estimated by using markers that differentiate West African and European ancestry. We assessed the relationship between allergic sensitization (defined as > or =1 allergen-specific IgE results) and both self-reported race and genetic ancestry. Regression models adjusted for sociodemographic variables, environmental exposures, and location of residence.ResultsThe average proportion of West African ancestry in African American participants was 0.69, whereas the mean proportion of European ancestry in white participants was 0.79. Self-reported African American race was associated with allergic sensitization when compared with those who reported being white (adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.22-3.93), even after adjusting for other variables. Genetic ancestry was not significantly associated with allergic sensitization after accounting for location of residence (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09 for urban vs suburban residence; 95% CI, 1.32-3.31).ConclusionSelf-reported race and location of residence appeared to be more important predictors of allergic sensitization when compared with genetic ancestry, suggesting that the disparity in allergic sensitization by race might be primarily a result of environmental factors rather than genetic differences.
| S-EPMC2951327 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Post-Human Genome Project progress has enabled a new wave of population genetic research, and intensified controversy over the use of race/ethnicity in this work. At the same time, the development of methods for inferring genetic ancestry offers more empirical means of assigning group labels. Here, we provide a systematic analysis of the use of race/ethnicity and ancestry in current genetic research. We base our analysis on key published recommendations for the use and reporting of race/ethnicity which advise that researchers: explain why the terms/categories were used and how they were measured, carefully define them, and apply them consistently. We studied 170 population genetic research articles from high impact journals, published 2008-2009. A comparative perspective was obtained by aligning study metrics with similar research from articles published 2001-2004. Our analysis indicates a marked improvement in compliance with some of the recommendations/guidelines for the use of race/ethnicity over time, while showing that important shortfalls still remain: no article using 'race', 'ethnicity' or 'ancestry' defined or discussed the meaning of these concepts in context; a third of articles still do not provide a rationale for their use, with those using 'ancestry' being the least likely to do so. Further, no article discussed potential socio-ethical implications of the reported research. As such, there remains a clear imperative for highlighting the importance of consistent and comprehensive reporting on human populations to the genetics/genomics community globally, to generate explicit guidelines for the uses of ancestry and genetic ancestry, and importantly, to ensure that guidelines are followed.
| S-EPMC3237839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Using genome-wide genotypes, we characterized the genetic structure of 103,006 participants in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California multi-ethnic Genetic Epidemiology Research on Adult Health and Aging Cohort and analyzed the relationship to self-reported race/ethnicity. Participants endorsed any of 23 race/ethnicity/nationality categories, which were collapsed into seven major race/ethnicity groups. By self-report the cohort is 80.8% white and 19.2% minority; 93.8% endorsed a single race/ethnicity group, while 6.2% endorsed two or more. Principal component (PC) and admixture analyses were generally consistent with prior studies. Approximately 17% of subjects had genetic ancestry from more than one continent, and 12% were genetically admixed, considering only nonadjacent geographical origins. Self-reported whites were spread on a continuum along the first two PCs, indicating extensive mixing among European nationalities. Self-identified East Asian nationalities correlated with genetic clustering, consistent with extensive endogamy. Individuals of mixed East Asian-European genetic ancestry were easily identified; we also observed a modest amount of European genetic ancestry in individuals self-identified as Filipinos. Self-reported African Americans and Latinos showed extensive European and African genetic ancestry, and Native American genetic ancestry for the latter. Among 3741 genetically identified parent-child pairs, 93% were concordant for self-reported race/ethnicity; among 2018 genetically identified full-sib pairs, 96% were concordant; the lower rate for parent-child pairs was largely due to intermarriage. The parent-child pairs revealed a trend toward increasing exogamy over time; the presence in the cohort of individuals endorsing multiple race/ethnicity categories creates interesting challenges and future opportunities for genetic epidemiologic studies.
| S-EPMC4574246 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesBlack patients have a higher incidence of kidney failure but lower rate of deceased- and living-donor kidney transplantation compared with White patients, even after taking differences in comorbidities into account. We assessed whether social determinants of health (e.g., demographics, cultural, psychosocial, knowledge factors) could account for race differences in receiving deceased- and living-donor kidney transplantation.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsVia medical record review, we prospectively followed 1056 patients referred for kidney transplant (2010-2012), who completed an interview soon after kidney transplant evaluation, until their kidney transplant. We used multivariable competing risk models to estimate the cumulative incidence of receipt of any kidney transplant, deceased-donor transplant, or living-donor transplant, and the factors associated with each outcome.ResultsEven after accounting for social determinants of health, Black patients had a lower likelihood of kidney transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.99) and living-donor transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.95), but not deceased-donor transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.26). Black race, older age, lower income, public insurance, more comorbidities, being transplanted before changes to the Kidney Allocation System, greater religiosity, less social support, less transplant knowledge, and fewer learning activities were each associated with a lower probability of any kidney transplant. Older age, more comorbidities, being transplanted before changes to the Kidney Allocation System, greater religiosity, less social support, and fewer learning activities were each associated with a lower probability of deceased-donor transplant. Black race, older age, lower income, public insurance, higher body mass index, dialysis before kidney transplant, not presenting with a potential living donor, religious objection to living-donor transplant, and less transplant knowledge were each associated with a lower probability of living-donor transplant.ConclusionsRace and social determinants of health are associated with the likelihood of undergoing kidney transplant.
| S-EPMC7863655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The genomic and immune landscapes of prostate cancer differ by self-identified race. However, few studies have examined the genome-wide copy number landscape and immune content of matched cohorts with genetic ancestry data and clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed prostate cancer somatic copy number alterations (sCNA) and tumor immune content of a grade-matched, surgically-treated cohort of 145 self-identified Black (BL) and 145 self-identified white (WH) patients with genetic ancestry estimation. A generalized linear model adjusted with age, pre-operative PSA, and Grade Group and filtered for germline copy number variations (gCNV) identified 143 loci where copy number varied significantly by percent African ancestry, clustering on chromosomes 6p, 10q, 11p, 12p, and 17p. Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for age, pre-operative PSA levels, and Grade Group revealed that chromosome 8q gains (including MYC) were significantly associated with biochemical recurrence and metastasis, independent of genetic ancestry. Finally, regulatory T-cell density in BL and WH patients was significantly correlated with percent genome altered, and these findings were validated in the TCGA cohort. Taken together, our findings identify specific sCNA linked to genetic ancestry and outcome in primary prostate cancer and demonstrate that regulatory T-cell infiltrate varies by global sCNA burden in primary disease.
2023-05-31 | GSE221219 | GEO
Project description:Background: Hispanic women have lower breast cancer incidence rates than non-Hispanic white (NHW) women. To what extent genetic versus nongenetic factors account for this difference is unknown.Methods: Using logistic regression, we evaluated the interactive influences of established risk factors and ethnicity (self-identified and identified by ancestral informative markers) on breast cancer risk among 2,326 Hispanic and 1,854 NHW postmenopausal women from the United States and Mexico in the Breast Cancer Health Disparities Study.Results: The inverse association between the percentage of Native American (NA) ancestry and breast cancer risk was only slightly attenuated after adjusting for known risk factors [lowest versus highest quartile: odds ratio (OR) =1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.92 among U.S. Hispanics; OR = 1.92 (95% CI, 1.29-2.86) among Mexican women]. The prevalence of several risk factors, as well as the associations with certain factors and breast cancer risk, differed according to genetic admixture. For example, higher body mass index (BMI) was associated with reduced risk among women with lower NA ancestry only [BMI <25 versus >30: OR = 0.65 (95% CI, 0.44-0.98) among U.S. Hispanics; OR = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.29-0.97) among Mexicans]. The average number of risk factors among cases was inversely related to the percentage of NA ancestry.Conclusions: The lower NA ancestry groups were more likely to have the established risk factors, with the exception of BMI. Although the majority of factors were associated with risk in the expected directions among all women, BMI had an inverse association among Hispanics with lower NA ancestry.Impact: These data suggest that the established risk factors are less relevant for breast cancer development among women with more NA ancestry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(5); 692-701. ©2016 AACR.
| S-EPMC5413419 | biostudies-literature