DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Association between the CYP1A2 rs762551 Polymorphism and Bladder Cancer Susceptibility: a Meta-Analysis Based on Case-Control Studies

  • Zeng, Yong (Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing Hospital of Zhejiang University) ;
  • Jiang, Hua-Yong (Department of Radiation Oncology, Beijing Military General Hospital) ;
  • Wei, Li (Department of Oncology, the 401 hospital of PLA) ;
  • Xu, Wei-Dong (Department of Radiation Oncology, Beijing Military General Hospital) ;
  • Wang, Ya-Jie (Department of Oncology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University) ;
  • Wang, Ya-Di (Department of Radiation Oncology, Beijing Military General Hospital) ;
  • Liu, Chuan (Department of Oncology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University)
  • Published : 2015.11.04

Abstract

Background: Previous studies evaluated associations between the CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and bladder cancer risk. However, the results were inconsistent. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of the published case-control studies to assess in detail the association between CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and bladder cancer risk. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched to identify relevant studies and the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated. Results: A total of seven articles including 3,013 cases and 2,771 controls were finally included. Overall, a significant association was found between the CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and bladder cancer susceptibility for CC vs AA (OR=0.82, 95% CI=0.69~0.99), but no significant associations were found for the other three models (AC vs AA: OR=0.91, 95% CI=0.81~1.02; the dominant model: OR=0.90, 95% CI=0.80~1.00; the recessive model: OR=0.84, 95% CI =0.72~1.00). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, we detected significant associations between the CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism and bladder cancer susceptibility for GA vs GG (OR = 0.78, 95% CI =0.64~0.96) and for the recessive model (OR=0.80, 95% CI=0.66~0.96) in Caucasians, but not for Asians. Conclusions: The results from the meta-analysis suggested that the CYP1A2 rs762551 polymorphism is a protective factor for bladder cancer, especially in Caucasians.

Keywords

Meta-analysis;CYP1A2 rs762551;bladder cancer;susceptibility;ethnicity

References

  1. Altayli E, Gunes S, Yilmaz AF, Goktas S, Bek Y (2009). CYP1A2, CYP2D6, GSTM1, GSTP1, and GSTT1 gene polymorphisms in patients with bladder cancer in a Turkish population. Int Urol Nephrol, 41, 259-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-008-9444-6
  2. Begg CB, Mazumdar M (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics, 50, 1088-101. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533446
  3. Bozina N, Bradamante V, Lovric M (2009). Genetic polymorphism of metabolic enzymes P450 (CYP) as a susceptibility factor for drug response, toxicity, and cancer risk. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol, 60, 217-42
  4. Butler MA, Lang NP, Young JF, et al (1992). Determination of CYP1A2 and NAT2 phenotypes in human populations by analysis of caffeine urinary metabolites. Pharmacogenetics, 2, 116-27. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008571-199206000-00003
  5. Chung WG, Kang JH, Park CS, Cho MH, Cha YN (2000). Effect of age and smoking on in vivo CYP1A2, flavin-containing monooxygenase, and xanthine oxidase activities in Koreans: determination by caffeine metabolism. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 67, 258-66. https://doi.org/10.1067/mcp.2000.104617
  6. Caporaso N, Landi MT, Vineis P (1991). Relevance of metabolic polymorphisms to human carcinogenesis: evaluation of epidemiologic evidence. Pharmacogenetics, 1, 4-19 https://doi.org/10.1097/00008571-199110000-00003
  7. Cochran WG (1954). The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics, 10, 101-29. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001666
  8. Cui X, Lu X, Hiura M, et al (2013). Association of genotypes of carcinogen-metabolizing enzymes and smoking status with bladder cancer in a Japanese population. Environ Health Prev Med, 18, 136-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12199-012-0302-x
  9. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986). Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials, 7, 177-88 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
  10. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997). Bias in metaanalysis detected by a simple graphical test. BMJ, 315, 629-34. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
  11. Figueroa JD, Malats N, Garcia-Closas M, et al (2008). Bladder cancer risk and genetic variation in AKR1C3 and other metabolizing genes. Carcinogenesis, 29, 1955-62. https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgn163
  12. Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med, 21, 1539-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186
  13. Ioannidis JP, Boffetta P, Little J, et al (2008). Assessment of cumulative evidence on genetic associations: interim guidelines. Int J Epidemiol, 37, 120-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dym159
  14. Kiemeney LA, Grotenhuis AJ, Vermeulen SH, Wu X (2009). Genome-wide association studies in bladder cancer: first results and potential relevance. Curr Opin Urol, 19, 540-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0b013e32832eb336
  15. Kiltie AE (2010). Common predisposition alleles for moderately common cancers: bladder cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev, 20, 218-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2010.01.002
  16. Li D, Jiao L, Li Y, et al (2006). Polymorphisms of cytochrome P4501A2 and N-acetyltransferase genes, smoking, and risk of pancreatic cancer. Carcinogenesis, 27, 103-11.
  17. Mandal RK, Dubey S, Panda AK, Mittal RD (2014). Genetic variants of NQO1 gene increase bladder cancer risk in Indian population and meta-analysis. Tumour Biol, 35, 6415-23 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-014-1869-1
  18. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst, 22, 719-48
  19. Minelli C, Thompson JR, Abrams KR, Thakkinstian A, Attia J (2008). How should we use information about HWE in the meta-analyses of genetic association studies? Int J Epidemiol, 37, 136-46. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dym234
  20. Miranda CL, Yang YH, Henderson MC, et al (2000). Prenylflavonoids from hops inhibit the metabolic activation of the carcinogenic heterocyclic amine 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4, 5-f]quinoline, mediated by cDNAexpressed human CYP1A2. Drug Metab Dispos, 28, 1297-302.
  21. Nordmark A, Lundgren S, Cnattingius S, Rane A (1999). Dietary caffeine as a probe agent for assessment of cytochrome P4501A2 activity in random urine samples. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 47, 397-402.
  22. Pavanello S, Simioli P, Lupi S, Gregorio P, Clonfero E (2002). Exposure levels and cytochrome P450 1A2 activity, but not N-acetyltransferase, glutathione S-transferase (GST) M1 and T1, influence urinary mutagen excretion in smokers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 11, 998-1003.
  23. Pavanello S, Mastrangelo G, Placidi D, et al (2010). CYP1A2 polymorphisms, occupational and environmental exposures and risk of bladder cancer. Eur J Epidemiol, 25, 491-500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9479-8
  24. Qiu LX, Yao L, Mao C, Yu KD, Zhan P, et al (2010). Lack of association of CYP1A2-164 A/C polymorphism with breast cancer susceptibility: A meta-analysis involving 17,600 subjects. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 122, 521-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0731-4
  25. Rodriguez-Antona C, Ingelman-Sundberg M (2006). Cytochrome P450 pharmacogenetics and cancer. Oncogene, 25, 1679-91. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1209377
  26. Sachse C, Bhambra U, Smith G, et al (2003). Colorectal Cancer Study Group. Polymorphisms in the cytochrome P450 CYP1A2 gene (CYP1A2) in colorectal cancer patients and controls: allele frequencies, linkage disequilibrium and influence on caffeine metabolism. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 55, 68-76. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2125.2003.01733.x
  27. Sachse C, Brockmoller J, Bauer S, Roots I (1999). Functional significance of a C>A polymorphism in intron 1 of the cytochrome P450 CYP1A2 gene tested with caffeine. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 47, 445-9.
  28. Sangrajrang S, Sato Y, Sakamoto H, et al (2009). Genetic polymorphisms of estrogen metabolizing enzyme and breast cancer risk in Thai women. Int J Cancer, 125, 837-43. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.24434
  29. Sesardic D, Boobis AR, Edwards RJ, Davies DS (1988). A form of cytochrome P450 in man, orthologous to form d in the rat, catalyses the odeethylation of phenacetin and is inducible by cigarette smoking. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 26, 363-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.1988.tb03393.x
  30. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014). Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin, 64, 9-29. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21208
  31. Stang A (2010). Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies inmeta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol, 25, 603-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z
  32. Sutton AJ, Duval SJ, Tweedie RL, Abrams KR, Jones DR (2000). Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on metaanalysis. BMJ, 320, 1574-7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1574
  33. Tsukino H, Kuroda Y, Nakao H, et al (2004). Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2, sulfotransferase (SULT) 1A1, and N-acetyltransferase (NAT) 2 polymorphisms and susceptibility to urothelial cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 130, 99-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-003-0512-0
  34. Villanueva CM, Silverman DT, Murta-Nascimento C, et al (2009). Coffee consumption, genetic susceptibility and bladder cancer risk. Cancer Causes Control, 20, 121-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-008-9226-6
  35. Volanis D, Kadiyska T, Galanis A, et al (2010). Environmental factors and genetic susceptibility promote urinary bladder cancer. Toxicol Lett, 193, 131-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.12.018
  36. Wang Y, Kong CZ, Zhang Z, Yang CM, Li J (2014). Relationships between CYP1A1 genetic polymorphisms and bladder cancer risk: a meta-analysis. DNA Cell Biol, 33, 171-81. https://doi.org/10.1089/dna.2013.2298
  37. Xiong T, Yang J, Wang H, et al (2014). The association between the Lys751Gln polymorphism in the XPD gene and the risk of bladder cancer. Mol Biol Rep, 41, 2629-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-014-3121-x