PURPOSE: We investigated the association between the length of the polymorphic trinucleotide CAG microsatellite repeats in exon 1 of the AR gene and the risk of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a nested case-control study of 1,159 cases and 1,353 controls from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, a randomized, placebo controlled trial testing whether the 5α-reductase inhibitor finasteride could decrease the 7-year prevalence of prostate cancer. During the course of the trial men underwent annual digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen measurement. Prostate biopsy was recommended in all men with abnormal digital rectal examination or finasteride adjusted prostate specific antigen greater than 4.0 ng/ml. Cases were drawn from men with biopsy determined prostate cancer identified by for cause or end of study biopsy. Controls were selected from men who completed the end of study biopsy. RESULTS:Mean CAG repeat length did not differ between cases and controls. The frequency distribution of cases and controls for the AR CAG repeat length was similar. There were no significant associations of CAG repeat length with prostate cancer risk when stratified by treatment arm (finasteride or placebo), or when combined. There was also no significant association between CAG repeat length and the risk of low or high grade prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: There is no association of AR CAG repeat length with prostate cancer risk. Knowledge of AR CAG repeat length provides no clinically useful information to predict prostate cancer risk.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We investigated the association between the length of the polymorphic trinucleotide CAG microsatellite repeats in exon 1 of the AR gene and the risk of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a nested case-control study of 1,159 cases and 1,353 controls from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, a randomized, placebo controlled trial testing whether the 5α-reductase inhibitor finasteride could decrease the 7-year prevalence of prostate cancer. During the course of the trial men underwent annual digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen measurement. Prostate biopsy was recommended in all men with abnormal digital rectal examination or finasteride adjusted prostate specific antigen greater than 4.0 ng/ml. Cases were drawn from men with biopsy determined prostate cancer identified by for cause or end of study biopsy. Controls were selected from men who completed the end of study biopsy. RESULTS: Mean CAG repeat length did not differ between cases and controls. The frequency distribution of cases and controls for the ARCAG repeat length was similar. There were no significant associations of CAG repeat length with prostate cancer risk when stratified by treatment arm (finasteride or placebo), or when combined. There was also no significant association between CAG repeat length and the risk of low or high grade prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: There is no association of ARCAG repeat length with prostate cancer risk. Knowledge of ARCAG repeat length provides no clinically useful information to predict prostate cancer risk.
Authors: Kelly J Cude; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Douglas K Price; Shannon C Dixon; Randall L Kincaid; Karl F Kovacs; David J Venzon; David J Liewehr; Margaret E Johnson; Eddie Reed; William D Figg Journal: Urol Int Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: A W Hsing; Y T Gao; G Wu; X Wang; J Deng; Y L Chen; I A Sesterhenn; F K Mostofi; J Benichou; C Chang Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Gary J Miller; Leslie G Ford; Michael M Lieber; R Duane Cespedes; James N Atkins; Scott M Lippman; Susie M Carlin; Anne Ryan; Connie M Szczepanek; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Simard; M Dumont; D Labuda; D Sinnett; C Meloche; M El-Alfy; L Berger; E Lees; F Labrie; S V Tavtigian Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: Grant Buchanan; Eleanor F Need; Jeffrey M Barrett; Tina Bianco-Miotto; Vanessa C Thompson; Lisa M Butler; Villis R Marshall; Wayne D Tilley; Gerhard A Coetzee Journal: Mol Cell Endocrinol Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 4.102
Authors: Xueying Mao; Jie Li; Xingxing Xu; Lara K Boyd; Weiyang He; Elzbieta Stankiewicz; Sakunthala C Kudahetti; Guangwen Cao; Daniel Berney; Guosheng Ren; Xin Gou; Hongwei Zhang; Yong-Jie Lu Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2014-11-19 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Zachary Klaassen; Lauren Howard; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher L Amling; Christopher J Kane; Stephen J Freedland Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: William D Figg; Cindy H Chau; Douglas K Price; Cathee Till; Phyllis J Goodman; Yonggon Cho; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Juergen K V Reichardt; Catherine M Tangen; Robin J Leach; Adrie van Bokhoven; Ian M Thompson; M Scott Lucia Journal: Urology Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Tristan M Sissung; Douglas K Price; Marzia Del Re; Ariel M Ley; Elisa Giovannetti; William D Figg; Romano Danesi Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2014-09-06