OBJECTIVE: Sex hormones are metabolized to less active compounds via (a) glucuronidation catalyzed by UDP-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT) and (b) sulfation catalyzed by sulfotransferases (SULT). Functional UGT and SULT polymorphisms can affect clearance of sex hormones, thereby influencing exposure in hormone-sensitive tissues, such as the breast. We assessed relationships between functional polymorphisms in the UGT and SULT genes and breast density in premenopausal women. METHODS: One hundred seventy-five women ages 40 to 45 years, who had a screening mammogram taken within the previous year, provided a genomic DNA sample. Mammograms were digitized to obtain breast density measures. Using generalized linear regression, we assessed associations between percent breast density and polymorphisms in the UGT1A and UGT2B families, SULT1A1, and SULT1E1. RESULTS: Women with the SULT1A1(H213/H213) genotype had 16% lower percent breast density compared with women with the SULT1A1(R213/R213) genotype after controlling for ethnicity (P = 0.001). Breast density was 5% lower among women carrying at least one copy of the UGT1A1(TA7)-UGT1A3(R11)-UGT1A3(A47) haplotype compared with the UGT1A1(TA6)-UGT1A3(W11R)-UGT1A3(V47A) haplotype (P = 0.07). No associations were observed between polymorphisms in the UGT2B family or SULT1E1 and breast density. CONCLUSION: Polymorphisms in SULT1A1 and the UGT1A locus may influence percent breast density in premenopausal women.
OBJECTIVE: Sex hormones are metabolized to less active compounds via (a) glucuronidation catalyzed by UDP-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT) and (b) sulfation catalyzed by sulfotransferases (SULT). Functional UGT and SULT polymorphisms can affect clearance of sex hormones, thereby influencing exposure in hormone-sensitive tissues, such as the breast. We assessed relationships between functional polymorphisms in the UGT and SULT genes and breast density in premenopausal women. METHODS: One hundred seventy-five women ages 40 to 45 years, who had a screening mammogram taken within the previous year, provided a genomic DNA sample. Mammograms were digitized to obtain breast density measures. Using generalized linear regression, we assessed associations between percent breast density and polymorphisms in the UGT1A and UGT2B families, SULT1A1, and SULT1E1. RESULTS:Women with the SULT1A1(H213/H213) genotype had 16% lower percent breast density compared with women with the SULT1A1(R213/R213) genotype after controlling for ethnicity (P = 0.001). Breast density was 5% lower among women carrying at least one copy of the UGT1A1(TA7)-UGT1A3(R11)-UGT1A3(A47) haplotype compared with the UGT1A1(TA6)-UGT1A3(W11R)-UGT1A3(V47A) haplotype (P = 0.07). No associations were observed between polymorphisms in the UGT2B family or SULT1E1 and breast density. CONCLUSION: Polymorphisms in SULT1A1 and the UGT1A locus may influence percent breast density in premenopausal women.
Authors: E Riza; I dos Santos Silva; B De Stavola; H L Bradlow; D W Sepkovic; D Linos; A Linos Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: B C Spink; B H Katz; M M Hussain; S Pang; S P Connor; K M Aldous; J F Gierthy; D C Spink Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Shelley A Gestl; Mitchell D Green; Debra A Shearer; Elizabeth Frauenhoffer; Thomas R Tephly; Judith Weisz Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Christopher A Haiman; Susan E Hankinson; Immaculata De Vivo; Chantal Guillemette; Naoko Ishibe; David J Hunter; Celia Byrne Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Araba A Adjei; Bianca A Thomae; Janel L Prondzinski; Bruce W Eckloff; Eric D Wieben; Richard M Weinshilboum Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Mellissa Yong; Stephen M Schwartz; Charlotte Atkinson; Karen W Makar; Sushma S Thomas; Frank Z Stanczyk; Kim C Westerlind; Katherine M Newton; Victoria L Holt; Wendy M Leisenring; Johanna W Lampe Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2010-12-28 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Hui Li; Maryellen L Giger; Chang Sun; Umnouy Ponsukcharoen; Dezheng Huo; Li Lan; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Andrew R Jamieson; Jeremy Bancroft Brown; Anna Di Rienzo Journal: Med Phys Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: C Sun; C Southard; D Huo; R D Hernandez; D B Witonsky; O I Olopade; A Di Rienzo Journal: Pharmacogenomics J Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 3.550
Authors: Vilde D Haakensen; Margarethe Biong; Ole Christian Lingjærde; Marit Muri Holmen; Jan Ole Frantzen; Ying Chen; Dina Navjord; Linda Romundstad; Torben Lüders; Ida K Bukholm; Hiroko K Solvang; Vessela N Kristensen; Giske Ursin; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale; Aslaug Helland Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Elena V Feofanova; Bing Yu; Ginger A Metcalf; Xiaoming Liu; Donna Muzny; Jennifer E Below; Lynne E Wagenknecht; Richard A Gibbs; Alanna C Morrison; Eric Boerwinkle Journal: Genetics Date: 2018-04-02 Impact factor: 4.562
Authors: Scott V Adams; Brian Barrick; Emily P Christopher; Martin M Shafer; Karen W Makar; Xiaoling Song; Johanna W Lampe; Hugo Vilchis; April Ulery; Polly A Newcomb Journal: Toxicol Appl Pharmacol Date: 2015-10-31 Impact factor: 4.219
Authors: Kimberly A Bertrand; A Heather Eliassen; Susan E Hankinson; Gretchen L Gierach; Xia Xu; Bernard Rosner; Regina G Ziegler; Rulla M Tamimi Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-09-28 Impact factor: 4.624