OBJECTIVES: We have undertaken a comprehensive study of common polymorphisms in genes of DNA repair, exploring both the risk of developing colorectal cancer and the prognosis of patients. METHODS: Subjects from a case-control study (377 cases and 329 controls) designed to assess gene-environment interactions were genotyped by use of an oligonucleotide microarray and the arrayed primer extension technique. Twenty-eight single nucleotide polymorphisms in 15 DNA repair genes were included. The candidate genes belong to different DNA repair pathways: base excision repair (OGG1, LIG3, APEX, POLB, XRCC1, PCNA, and MUTYH), nucleotide excision repair (ERCC1, ERCC2, ERCC4, and ERCC5), double-strand breaks repair (XRCC2, XRCC3, and XRCC9), and reversion repair (MGMT) genes. RESULTS: Polymorphism OGG1 S326C was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer [odds ratio (OR), 2.3; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.1-5.0], the risk being higher in younger individuals. A haplotype of ERCC1 was associated with increased risk (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.0-5.3). POLB P242R was also associated with decreased risk (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.99), although the number of variant allele carriers was low. In the univariate analysis, adjusted for age, sex, and Dukes' stage, three polymorphisms were significantly associated with better prognosis: XRCC1 R399Q [hazard ratio (HR), 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17-0.85], XRCC3 T141M (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97), and MGMT L84F (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.02-0.99). ERCC1 19007T>C was associated with worse prognosis (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.27). In a multivariate analysis, only XRCC1 R399Q and ERCC1 19007T>C remained significant. These associations were stronger among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall effect of DNA repair genes in colorectal cancer etiology seems limited, their influence in the response to chemotherapy and prognosis may be more relevant. This knowledge may help to clarify the utility of specific adjuvant treatments according to the individual genetic background.
OBJECTIVES: We have undertaken a comprehensive study of common polymorphisms in genes of DNA repair, exploring both the risk of developing colorectal cancer and the prognosis of patients. METHODS: Subjects from a case-control study (377 cases and 329 controls) designed to assess gene-environment interactions were genotyped by use of an oligonucleotide microarray and the arrayed primer extension technique. Twenty-eight single nucleotide polymorphisms in 15 DNA repair genes were included. The candidate genes belong to different DNA repair pathways: base excision repair (OGG1, LIG3, APEX, POLB, XRCC1, PCNA, and MUTYH), nucleotide excision repair (ERCC1, ERCC2, ERCC4, and ERCC5), double-strand breaks repair (XRCC2, XRCC3, and XRCC9), and reversion repair (MGMT) genes. RESULTS: Polymorphism OGG1S326C was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer [odds ratio (OR), 2.3; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.1-5.0], the risk being higher in younger individuals. A haplotype of ERCC1 was associated with increased risk (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.0-5.3). POLBP242R was also associated with decreased risk (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.99), although the number of variant allele carriers was low. In the univariate analysis, adjusted for age, sex, and Dukes' stage, three polymorphisms were significantly associated with better prognosis: XRCC1R399Q [hazard ratio (HR), 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17-0.85], XRCC3T141M (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97), and MGMTL84F (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.02-0.99). ERCC1 19007T>C was associated with worse prognosis (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.27). In a multivariate analysis, only XRCC1R399Q and ERCC1 19007T>C remained significant. These associations were stronger among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall effect of DNA repair genes in colorectal cancer etiology seems limited, their influence in the response to chemotherapy and prognosis may be more relevant. This knowledge may help to clarify the utility of specific adjuvant treatments according to the individual genetic background.
Authors: Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta; Gesina van Lijnschoten; Valery E P P Lemmens; Harm J T Rutten; Adriaan J C van den Brule Journal: Mol Diagn Ther Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 4.074
Authors: Michele C Gornick; Xavier Castellsague; Gloria Sanchez; Thomas J Giordano; Michelle Vinco; Joel K Greenson; Gabriel Capella; Leon Raskin; Gad Rennert; Stephen B Gruber; Victor Moreno Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 2.506