| Literature DB >> 15642171 |
Habibul Ahsan1, Alice S Whittemore, Yu Chen, Ruby T Senie, Steven P Hamilton, Qiao Wang, Irina Gurvich, Regina M Santella.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Case-control studies have reported inconsistent results concerning breast cancer risk and polymorphisms in genes that control endogenous estrogen biosynthesis. We report findings from the first family-based association study examining associations between female breast cancer risk and polymorphisms in two key estrogen-biosynthesis genes CYP17 (T-->C promoter polymorphism) and CYP19 (TTTA repeat polymorphism).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2004 PMID: 15642171 PMCID: PMC1064100 DOI: 10.1186/bcr951
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breast Cancer Res ISSN: 1465-5411 Impact factor: 6.466
Genotype distribution of the study population by gender, family relationship and affected status
| Mothers | Daughters | ||||||
| Genotype | Affected | Unaffected | Affected | Unaffected | Fathers | Sons | Total |
| CC | 2 | 10 | 47 | 41 | 6 | 11 | 117 |
| CT | 8 | 32 | 147 | 108 | 30 | 22 | 347 |
| TT | 2 | 19 | 107 | 61 | 8 | 18 | 215 |
| Unknown | 64 | 140 | 0 | 0 | 233 | 0 | 437 |
| Total | 76 | 201 | 301 | 210 | 277 | 51 | 1116 |
| 7/7 | 1 | 15 | 88 | 55 | 7 | 21 | 187 |
| 7/8 | 0 | 10 | 34 | 29 | 4 | 5 | 82 |
| 7/9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| 7/10 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 14 |
| 7/11 | 9 | 19 | 106 | 71 | 14 | 19 | 238 |
| 7/12 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 19 |
| 7/13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 8/8 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 8/10 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 8/11 | 1 | 2 | 24 | 16 | 1 | 3 | 47 |
| 8/12 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 8/13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 9/11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 10/11 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 7 |
| 11/11 | 0 | 5 | 19 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 42 |
| 11/12 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 11/13 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| 11/not 11a | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 9 |
| Unknown | 63 | 143 | 0 | 0 | 241 | 0 | 447 |
| Total | 76 | 202 | 302 | 214 | 278 | 51 | 1123 |
aIndicates those whose genotype cannot be inferred for both alleles; the other allele could be 7, 8, or 12. Two of these nine observations, one an unaffected mother and the other the father in the same nuclear family, will be excluded when the allele with 10 or more repeats is selected as bad allele, because either them could be 11/12.
Distribution of participating nuclear families according to mother's breast cancer status, mother's and father's carrier status of the CYP17 and CYP19 variant alleles, and number of affected and unaffected daughters
| Number of nuclear families according to mother's breast cancer status and genotype | Number of nuclear families according to father's genotype | ||||||||||
| Number of daughters affected/unaffected | Affected | Unaffected | Total | Total | |||||||
| Carrier | Non-carrier | Unknown | Carrier | Non-carrier | Unknown | Carrier | Non-carrier | Unknown | |||
| 1/0 | 3 | 0 | 19 | 17 | 12 | 29 | 80 | 12 | 2 | 66 | 80 |
| 1/1 | 5 | 2 | 38 | 16 | 6 | 85 | 152 | 19 | 4 | 129 | 152 |
| 1/2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 14 | 20 | 4 | 2 | 14 | 20 |
| 1/3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 2/0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16 |
| 2/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 2+/2+ | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| Total | 10 | 2 | 64 | 42 | 19 | 140 | 277 | 36 | 8 | 233 | 277 |
| 1/0 | 4 | 0 | 17 | 14 | 13 | 29 | 77 | 7 | 4 | 66 | 77 |
| 1/1 | 5 | 1 | 40 | 12 | 9 | 88 | 155 | 10 | 6 | 139 | 155 |
| 1/2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 14 | 22 | 5 | 2 | 15 | 22 |
| 1/3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 2/0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 16 | 1 | 0 | 15 | 16 |
| 2/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 2+/2+ | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Total | 12 | 1 | 63 | 33 | 25 | 144 | 278 | 24 | 12 | 242 | 278 |
| 1/0 | 4 | 0 | 17 | 11 | 16 | 29 | 77 | 6 | 5 | 66 | 77 |
| 1/1 | 5 | 1 | 40 | 11 | 10 | 88 | 155 | 9 | 7 | 139 | 155 |
| 1/2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 13 | 22 | 5 | 3 | 14 | 22 |
| 1/3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 2/0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 16 | 1 | 0 | 15 | 16 |
| 2/1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 2+/2+ | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Total | 12 | 1 | 63 | 30 | 29 | 143 | 278 | 22 | 15 | 241 | 278 |
Association between the CYP19 and CYP17 variant alleles and breast cancer
| Nonfounder statistic | Founder statistic | ||||||
| Variant allele(s) | Estimated allele frequency (%) | Recessive model | Dominant model | Additive model | Recessive model | Dominant model | Additive model |
| C | 42.46 | - 1.01 | - 1.52 | - 1.85 | 0.40 | 1.08 | 1.01 |
| | 0.16 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.34 | 0.14 | 0.16 | |
| (TTTA)≥10 | 33.71 | - 1.24 | 1.26 | 0.32 | - 0.32 | 1.13 | |
| | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.38 | 0.37 | 0.05 | 0.13 | |
| (TTTA)11 | 28.78 | - 1.09 | 0.97 | - 1.50 | 0.89 | ||
| | 0.14 | 0.03 | 0.17 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.19 | |
P values are based on one-tailed test statistics. Values that are statistically significant at one-tailed test are displayed in bold type.
Conditional logistic regression analysis of discordant sibships for the association between CYP17 and CYP19 genotypes and breast cancer
| Gene (sibling sets/cases/controls) | Affected ( | Unaffected ( | Adjusted odds ratios for breast cancer (95% CI) | |
| Dominant model | TT | 59 | 56 | 1.00 |
| TC/CC | 112 | 132 | 0.86 (0.47–1.59) | |
| Recessive model | TC/TT | 146 | 154 | 1.00 |
| CC | 25 | 34 | 0.61 (0.27–1.41) | |
| General model | TT | 59 | 56 | 1.00 |
| TC | 87 | 98 | 0.86 (0.47–1.59) | |
| CC | 25 | 34 | 0.55 (0.21–1.42) | |
| Additive model (trend per allele) | 0.77 (0.49–1.21) | |||
| Dominant model | (TTTA)<10(TTTA)<10 | 67 | 78 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)≥10(TTTA)<10/(TTTA)≥10(TTTA)≥10 | 108 | 115 | 1.24 (0.63–2.46) | |
| Recessive model | (TTTA)<10(TTTA)<10/(TTTA)≥10(TTTA)<10 | 159 | 173 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)≥10(TTTA)≥10 | 16 | 20 | 0.82 (0.30–2.24) | |
| General model | (TTTA)<10(TTTA)<10 | 67 | 78 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)≥10(TTTA)<10 | 92 | 95 | 1.26 (0.64–2.51) | |
| (TTTA)≥10(TTTA)≥10 | 16 | 20 | 0.98 (0.30–3.18) | |
| Additive model (trend per allele) | 1.11 (0.65–1.89) | |||
| Dominant model | (TTTA)other(TTTA)other | 77 | 95 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)11(TTTA)other/(TTTA)11(TTTA)11 | 98 | 98 | 1.77 (0.90–3.47) | |
| Recessive model | (TTTA)other(TTTA)other/(TTTA)11(TTTA)other | 165 | 179 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)11(TTTA)11 | 10 | 14 | 0.66 (0.19–2.33) | |
| General model | (TTTA)other(TTTA)other | 77 | 95 | 1.00 |
| (TTTA)11(TTTA)other | 88 | 84 | 1.84 (0.93–3.63) | |
| (TTTA)11(TTTA)11 | 10 | 14 | 1.04 (0.27–4.08) | |
| Additive model (trend per allele) | 1.38 (0.79–2.40) | |||
Odds ratios were adjusted for age (in years), hormone replacement use (ever/never), oral contraceptive use (ever/never), age at menarche (in years), full term pregnancies (yes/no). Each sibling set had at least one breast cancer case and one sister control. All the subjects included in the analysis had information for all the covariate variables. CI, confidence interval.
Association between parental carrier status of the variant allele(s) and breast cancer risk in daughters
| Test statistic | ||||
| Mothers' carrier status and disease risk in daughters | Fathers' carrier status and disease risk in daughters | |||
| Variant allele(s) | Additive | Dominant | Additive | Dominant |
| C | 1.47 | 1.09 | 1.40 | 1.07 |
| | 0.07 | 0.14 | 0.08 | 0.14 |
| (TTTA)≥10 | 1.73 | 1.65 | 0.95 | 0.45 |
| | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.17 | 0.33 |
| (TTTA)11 | 1.52 | 1.96 | - 0.11 | 0.18 |
| | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.46 | 0.43 |
The test statistic was calculated under the additive model. P values are based on one-tailed test statistics.