PURPOSE: The epidermal growth factor (EGF) pathway is important in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) tumorigenesis. We hypothesized that the EGF A61G homozygous variant genotype (GG) is (a) both a risk and poor prognostic factor for EAC and (b) associated with higher EGF serum levels in individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Using unconditional logistic regression, we compared EGF A61G in 312 EAC cases and 447 GERD-free controls, adjusting for age, gender, smoking history, and healthy adult body mass index. Using the method of Kaplan and Meier, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazard models, we correlated EGF A61G with overall and failure-free survival in the EAC cases. Serum EGF levels and EGF genotype (G/G versus others) were correlated in 144 GERD patients using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: The EGF A61G G/G genotype conferred increased EAC risk, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.81 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.7), and was even higher in the subgroup of EAC patients with concurrent Barrett's esophagus (adjusted odds ratio, 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.7). However, EGF A61G was not associated with a more aggressive phenotype or prognosis in EAC patients. Higher serum EGF levels were found in GERD patients carrying G/G compared with A/A or A/G (P = 0.03, Wilcoxon rank sum test). CONCLUSION: The EGF A61G G/G genotype is associated with a near 2-fold greater risk of EAC. The G/G allele was also associated with higher EGF levels in tumor-free patients with GERD. EGF genotyping can potentially identify high-risk patients with GERD and Barrett's metaplasia who might benefit from increased surveillance.
PURPOSE: The epidermal growth factor (EGF) pathway is important in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) tumorigenesis. We hypothesized that the EGFA61G homozygous variant genotype (GG) is (a) both a risk and poor prognostic factor for EAC and (b) associated with higher EGF serum levels in individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Using unconditional logistic regression, we compared EGFA61G in 312 EAC cases and 447 GERD-free controls, adjusting for age, gender, smoking history, and healthy adult body mass index. Using the method of Kaplan and Meier, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazard models, we correlated EGFA61G with overall and failure-free survival in the EAC cases. Serum EGF levels and EGF genotype (G/G versus others) were correlated in 144 GERDpatients using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: The EGFA61G G/G genotype conferred increased EAC risk, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.81 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.7), and was even higher in the subgroup of EAC patients with concurrent Barrett's esophagus (adjusted odds ratio, 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.7). However, EGFA61G was not associated with a more aggressive phenotype or prognosis in EAC patients. Higher serum EGF levels were found in GERDpatients carrying G/G compared with A/A or A/G (P = 0.03, Wilcoxon rank sum test). CONCLUSION: The EGFA61G G/G genotype is associated with a near 2-fold greater risk of EAC. The G/G allele was also associated with higher EGF levels in tumor-free patients with GERD. EGF genotyping can potentially identify high-risk patients with GERD and Barrett's metaplasia who might benefit from increased surveillance.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Majid Shahbazi; Vera Pravica; Najma Nasreen; Hana Fakhoury; Anthony A Fryer; Richard C Strange; Peter E Hutchinson; Joy E Osborne; John T Lear; Andrew G Smith; Ian V Hutchinson Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-02-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Kandace L Amend; James T Elder; Lynn P Tomsho; Joseph D Bonner; Timothy M Johnson; Jennifer Schwartz; Marianne Berwick; Stephen B Gruber Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Kenneth K Tanabe; Antoinette Lemoine; Dianne M Finkelstein; Hiroshi Kawasaki; Tsutomu Fujii; Raymond T Chung; Gregory Y Lauwers; Yakup Kulu; Alona Muzikansky; Darshini Kuruppu; Michael Lanuti; Jonathan M Goodwin; Daniel Azoulay; Bryan C Fuchs Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-01-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Winson Y Cheung; Rihong Zhai; Matthew H Kulke; Rebecca S Heist; Kofi Asomaning; Clement Ma; Zhaoxi Wang; Li Su; Michael Lanuti; Kenneth K Tanabe; David C Christiani; Geoffrey Liu Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2009-06-11 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Winson Y Cheung; Rihong Zhai; Penny Bradbury; Jessica Hopkins; Matthew H Kulke; Rebecca S Heist; Kofi Asomaning; Clement Ma; Wei Xu; Zhaoxi Wang; Suzanne Hooshmand; Li Su; David C Christiani; Geoffrey Liu Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Siwen Hu-Lieskovan; Daniel Vallbohmer; Wu Zhang; Dongyun Yang; Alexander Pohl; Melissa J Labonte; Peter P Grimminger; Arnulf H Hölscher; Robert Semrau; Dirk Arnold; Kathrin Dellas; Annelies Debucquoy; Karin Haustermans; Jean-Pascal H Machiels; Christine Sempoux; Claus Rödel; Matej Bracko; Vaneja Velenik; Heinz-Josef Lenz Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 12.531