Literature DB >> 23404160

BLM and RAD51 genes polymorphism and susceptibility to breast cancer.

Agnieszka Sassi1, Marcin Popielarski, Ewelina Synowiec, Zbigniew Morawiec, Katarzyna Wozniak.   

Abstract

DNA repair by homologous recombination is one of the main processes of DNA double strand breaks repair. In the present work we performed a case-control study (304 cases and 319 controls) to check an association between the genotypes of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C and the g.85394 A>G polymorphisms of the BLM gene and breast cancer occurrence. Genotypes were determined in DNA from peripheral blood by PCR-RLFP and by PCR-CTPP. We observed an association between breast cancer occurrence and the T/G genotype (OR 4.41) of the c.-61 G>T-RAD51 polymorphism, the A/A genotype (OR 1.69) of the g.85394 A>G-BLM polymorphism and the A/A genotype (OR 2.49) of the g.96267 A>C-BLM polymorphism. Moreover, we demonstrated a correlation between intra- and intergenes genotypes combinations and breast cancer occurrence. We found a correlation between progesterone receptor expression and the T/G genotype (OR 0.57) of the c.-61 G>T- RAD51 polymorphism. We also found a correlation between the T/G genotype (OR 1.86) and the T/T genotype (OR 0.56) of the c.-61 G>T- RAD51 polymorphism and the lymph node metastasis. We showed an association between the A/A genotype (OR 2.45) and the A/C genotype (OR 0.41) of the g.96267 A>C-BLM polymorphism and G3 grade of tumor. Our results suggest that the variability of the RAD51 and BLM genes may play a role in breast cancer occurrence. This role may be underlined by a common interaction between these genes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23404160      PMCID: PMC3708281          DOI: 10.1007/s12253-013-9602-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res        ISSN: 1219-4956            Impact factor:   3.201


Introduction

Breast cancer is one of the major causes of cancer death among women in the world. Progress in many fields of science has enabled to understand the mechanism of carcinogenesis in breast, but so far there has not been found any clear reason of breast cancer. Two main groups of breast cancer risk factors are genetic and environmental ones, among which the most important are age and breast cancer occurrence in the first and/or second step relatives. In this case, particularly important are mutations in two high penetrance genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 [1, 2], which are associated with the processes of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) repair. A number of studies show link between hereditary as well as sporadic breast cancer and genetic instability caused by DSBs [3-6]. DSBs can be repaired by nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) [7], homologous recombination repair (HRR) [8] and single-strand annealing (SSA) [9]. However, HRR has been found to be a key pathway in human cells for the repair of DSBs [10]. DNA repair by homologous recombination is particularly important during and following DNA replication, when a sister chromatid is present as a template for repair. In eukaryotes, the central homologous recombination protein is RAD51 which catalyses strand transfer between a broken sequence and its undamaged homologue to allow re-synthesis of the damaged region [10-13]. BLM helicase physically and functionally interacts with RAD51 and has been reported to displace RAD51 from the nucleoprotein filament that is responsible for homology searching and strand invasion [14, 15]. BLM activity in relation to RAD51 protein depends on the conformation of the RAD51-ssDNA (single strand DNA) nucleofilaments which are formed by RAD51 protein in presence of RPA protein and ATP. BLM can destabilize RAD51-ssDNA nucleofilaments if they are in an inactive form, that is, after joining the ADP. When the RAD51-ssDNA nucleofilaments are in an active form, after the ATP joining, BLM stimulates strand exchange carried out by RAD51 [16, 17]. Loss of RAD51 and BLM proteins may contribute to an increased number of somatic mutations and rearrangements of chromosomes. It also contributes to abnormal chromosome segregation, aneuploidy, chromosomal instability, sensitivity to DNA damaging agents and loss of heterozygosity. All the disturbances can lead to reduction of the efficiency of DNA repair processes, cause genomic instability and finally lead to the development of cancer [18]. In breast cancer patients decreasing of the amount of RAD51 protein was observed in 30 % of the cases [19] whereas loss of heterozygosity was observed in 32 % of the cases [20]. The risk of malignant transformation in cells with deficiency of BLM is a hundred times greater than in cells containing a fully functional BLM helicase [21]. On the other hand, different variants of naturally occurring polymorphisms of genes involved in DNA repair can contribute to changes in the efficiency of the repair processes, which may result in the development of cancer [5, 22–27]. The fact that RAD51 and BLM proteins are acting together during DNA repair by homologous recombination prompted us to examine a correlation between polymorphic variants (SNPs) of the RAD51 gene (c.-61 G>T, rs 1801321 and g.38922 C>G, rs 4417527) and the BLM gene (g.96267 A>C, rs 2270132 and g.85394 A>G, rs 2380165) and breast cancer risk. We also studied an association between these polymorphisms of the RAD51 and BLM genes and clinical characteristics of breast cancer patients such as lymph node status, tumor grade, hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone receptors) and epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) expression.

Materials and Methods

Patients

Blood samples were obtained from 304 women (mean age 60 years) with sporadic breast cancer treated at the Department of Surgical Oncology, N. Copernicus Hospital (Lodz, Poland). The clinical characteristic of breast cancer patients is presented in Table 1. Blood was collected before surgical treatment and chemotherapy. The control group (319 women) consisted of age-matched women who were not diagnosed with cancer and recruited from Commune Health Clinic in Rzgow and Institute Polish Mother’s Health Center (Lodz, Poland). The Local Ethic Committee approved the study and each patient gave a written consent.
Table 1

The clinical characteristics of breast cancer patients

CharacteristicPatients (number/percentage)
Age
 Range: 32–92304/100
 Mean age ± SD: 60 ± 11
Carcinoma ductale 237/78
Carcinoma intraductale 12/4
Carcinoma lobulare 37/12
Carcinoma medullare 1/0.3
Carcinoma metaplasticum 3/1
Carcinoma metatypicum 1/0.3
Carcinoma mucinosum 9/3
Carcinoma papillare 2/0.7
Carcinoma tubulare 2/0.7
Node
 Positive89/29
 Negative114/38
 Not determined101/33
Tumor grade by Bloom-Richardson grading system
 117/6
 294/31
 3104/34
 Not determined89/29
ER
 Positive188/62
 Negative73/24
 Not determined43/14
PR
 Positive167/55
 Negative94/31
 Not determined43/14
HER2
 Positive50/16
 Negative187/62
 Not determined67/22
The clinical characteristics of breast cancer patients

Genomic DNA Isolation

Genomic DNA was prepared from peripheral blood of breast cancer patients and healthy individuals by using of commercial Blood Genomic DNA Miniprep Kit (Axygen Biosciences, CA, USA), as recommended by the manufacturer.

Selection of Polymorphisms and Primers Design

We obtained a list of SNPs in the RAD51 and BLM genes from the public domain of the National Center for Biotechnology Information the Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms database (NCBI dbSNP) at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp. For this study we chose the c.-61 G>T (rs1801321) and g.38922G>C (rs4417527) polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C (rs2270132) and g.85394 A>G (rs2380165) polymorphisms of the BLM gene with a minor allele frequency (MAF) 0.467, 0.109, 0.376 and 0.333 in European population, respectively (submitter population ID: HapMap-CEU for all; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp). Primers were designed according to the published nucleotide sequence in ENSEMBL database (RAD51 gene ID: ENSG00000051180 and BLM gene ID: ENSG00000197299) and using Primer3 software for c.-61 G>T, g.38922 G>C, g.96267 A>C SNPs (http://frodo.wi.mit.edu/) and Web-based allele-specific primer software for g.85394 SNP (http://bioinfo.biotec.or.th/WASP).

Genotype Determination

The restriction fragment length polymorphism reaction (PCR-RFLP) was used to determine the genotypes of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C polymorphism of the BLM gene. The polymerase chain reaction with confronting two-pair primers (PCR-CTPP) was used to determine the genotypes of the g.85394 A>G polymorphism of the BLM gene. PCR reaction was performed in a total reaction volume of 25 μl containing 50 ng of genomic DNA, 1 U Biotools DNA polymerase (Biotools, Madrid, Spain), 1 × reaction buffer (750 mM Tris-HCl (pH 9.0), 500 mM KCl, 200 mM (NH4)2SO4), 0.2 mM of each dNTP, 1.5 mM MgCl2 and 0.25 μM of each primer (Metabion, Martinsried, Germany). The primer sequences are presented in Table 2. PCR amplifications were conducted in DNA Engine thermal cycler (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA). Thermal cycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation step at 95 °C for 5 min, 34 cycles at 95 °C for 30 s, 30 s at 65 °C annealing temperature and 60 s at 72 °C.
Table 2

Primer sequences of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C and the g.85394 A>G polymorphisms of the BLM gene

GenePrimer sequences
RAD51 gene
c.-61 G>T; rs 1801321
Sense5′-TGGGAACTGCAACTCATCTGG-3′
Antisense5′-GCTCCGACTTCACCCCGCCGG-3′
g.38922 C>G; rs 4417527
Sense5′-GGCTATTTGGCCAGATTGATAG-3′
Antisense5′-TCCGGAGTAGCTGGGACTAC-3′
BLM gene
g.96267 A>C; rs 2270132
Sense5′-CAGGCTCCCGGATTCTACTC-3′
Antisense5′-TGTACACCCCCTAGACG-3′
g.85394 A>G; rs 2380165
SenseF1 5′-GGGAGGGCTGCATACACAGAAGC-3′
F2 5′-GGGGATAGCTGAAGGAAATGAGAAAGGAAACTA-3′
AntisenseR1 5′-GGTGGGAACCTGTGGGGTGC-3′
R2 5′-TCAACGCTCTTTTCATCATCTCCTGCC-3′
Primer sequences of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C and the g.85394 A>G polymorphisms of the BLM gene The products of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A > C polymorphism of the BLM gene were digested overnight with 0.2 U of the restriction enzyme NgoMIV, NlaIII and StyI (NEB New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA), respectively. The PCR products were separated into 8 % polyacrylamide gel, stained with ethidium bromide and viewed under UV light. Figure 1 presents a representative gels from analysis of the c.-61 G>T (A) and the g.38922 C>G (B) polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C (C) and the g.85394 A>G (D) polymorphisms of the BLM gene.
Fig. 1

Genotypes of the c.-61 G>T (rs1801321) (a) and the g.38922 C>G (rs4417527) (b) polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C (rs2270132) (c) and the g.85394 A>G (rs2380165) (d) polymorphisms of the BLM gene analyzed by a 8 % polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis stained with ethidium bromide and viewed under UV light. Lane M shows GeneRuler TM 100 bp molecular weight marker; lane K on the picture C shows a control comprising PCR product without reaction with StyI restriction enzyme; lane K on the picture D shows a control comprising reaction mixture with F1 and R1 starters; all remaining lanes present genotypes indicated in the upper part of the pictures

Genotypes of the c.-61 G>T (rs1801321) (a) and the g.38922 C>G (rs4417527) (b) polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C (rs2270132) (c) and the g.85394 A>G (rs2380165) (d) polymorphisms of the BLM gene analyzed by a 8 % polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis stained with ethidium bromide and viewed under UV light. Lane M shows GeneRuler TM 100 bp molecular weight marker; lane K on the picture C shows a control comprising PCR product without reaction with StyI restriction enzyme; lane K on the picture D shows a control comprising reaction mixture with F1 and R1 starters; all remaining lanes present genotypes indicated in the upper part of the pictures

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using STATISTICA 8.0 package (Statsoft, Tulsa, OK, USA). Distributions of genotypes and alleles between groups were tested using the χ 2 analysis. The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was checked using the χ 2 test to compare the observed genotype frequencies with the expected frequencies among the case and control subjects. For each SNP, the odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A linkage between genotype, cancer and clinical parameters was assessed by the logistic regression.

Results

Genotype Analysis

Breast cancer patients and controls were divided into groups corresponding to three genotypes. The genotype distributions for the c.-61 G>T and g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene were in agreement with those predicted by the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (p > 0.05), except for that of the c.-61 G>T polymorphism for the patients group. It is caused by very low presence of the G/G genotype of the c.-61 G>T polymorphism of the RAD51 gene in the Polish population. In the case of genotype distributions for the g.96267 A>C and g.85394 A>G polymorphisms of the BLM gene they differed significantly from those predicted by the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (p < 0.05), which can be caused by lack of the G/G genotype of the g.85394 A>G polymorphism and the C/C genotype of the g.96267 A>C polymorphism of the BLM gene in the Polish population. The distribution of genotypes of polymorphic variants of the RAD51 and BLM genes and intragene and intergene genotypes combinations for cancer patients and controls is shown in Table 3.
Table 3

The genotype and allele frequency and odds ratios (OR) of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.85394 A>G and the g.96267 A>C polymorphisms of the BLM gene in breast cancer patients and controls

Genotype or alleleBreast cancer patients (n = 304)Controls (n = 319)OR (95 % Cl) p
NumberFrequencyNumberFrequency
RAD51 c.-61 G>T
 T/T1390.462600.820.19 (0.13–0.27)↓<0.001
 T/G1520.50590.184.41 (3.07–6.32)↑<0.001
 G/G130.0400
 T4300.715790.910.20 (0.14–0.28)↓<0.001
RAD51 g.38922 C>G
 C/C2170.712500.780.69 (0.48–0.99)↓0.045
 C/G830.27650.201.47 (1.01–2.13)↑0.043
 G/G40.0140.011.05 (0.26–4.24)0.945
 C5170.855650.890.72 (0.52–1.02)0.061
BLM g.85394 A>G
 A/A2310.762080.651.69 (1.19–2.40)↑0.003
 A/G730.241110.350.59 (0.42–0.84)↓0.003
 G/G0000
 A5350.885270.831.54 (1.12–2.12)↑0.003
BLM g.96267 A>C
 A/A550.18260.082.49 (1.52–4.09)↑<0.001
 A/C2490.822930.920.40 (0.25–0.66)↓<0.001
 C/C0000
 A3590.593450.541.22 (0.97–1.53)↑<0.001
RAD51 (c.-61 G>T and g.38922 C>G)
 TT/CC1050.352070.650.29 (0.21–0.40)↓<0.001
 TT/CG330.11510.160.64 (0.40–1.02)0.062
 TG/CC1040.34430.133.34 (2.24–4.98)↑<0.001
 TG/CG450.15140.043.79 (2.03–7.05)↑<0.001
BLM (g.85394 A>G and g.96267 A>C)
 AA/AA430.15200.052.46 (1.41–4.29)↑0.001
 AA/AC1880.621880.591.13 (0.82–1.56)0.458
 AG/AC610.201050.330.51 (0.36–0.74) ↓<0.001
RAD51 (c.-61 G>T) and BLM (g.96267 A>C)
 TT/AA230.08220.071.11 (0.60–2.03)0.747
 TT/AC1160.382380.750.21 (0.15–0.30)↓<0.001
 TG/AA290.1040.018.31 (2.88–23.92)↑<0.001
 TG/AC1230.40550.173.26 (2.25–4.72)↑<0.001
RAD51 (c.-61 G>T) and BLM (g.85394 A>G)
 TT/AA1010.331730.540.42 (0.30–0.58)↓<0.001
 TT/AG380.13870.270.38 (0.25–0.58)↓<0.001
 TG/AA1200.39350.115.29 (3.48–8.05)↑<0.001
 TG/AG320.11240.081.45 (0.83–2.52)0.192
RAD51 (g.38922 C>G) and BLM (g.96267 A>C)
 GG/AA320.11190.061.86 (1.03–3.35)↑0.040
 GG/AC1850.612310.720.59 (0.42–0.83)↓0.002
 GC/AA220.0770.023.48 (1.46–8.26)↑0.005
 GC/AC610.20580.181.13 (0.76–1.69)0.550
RAD51 (g.38922 C>G) and BLM (g.85394 A>G)
 GG/AA1630.541600.501.15 (0.84–1.57)0.387
 GG/AG540.18900.280.55 (0.38–0.81)↓0.002
 GC/AA650.21460.141.61 (1.07–2.45)↑0.024
 GC/AG180.06190.060.99 (0.51–1.93)0.985
The genotype and allele frequency and odds ratios (OR) of the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.85394 A>G and the g.96267 A>C polymorphisms of the BLM gene in breast cancer patients and controls

Clinical Parameters of Breast Cancer Patients and BLM and RAD51 Genes Polymorphism

We checked the distribution of genotypes and frequency of alleles of the BLM and RAD51 genes polymorphisms in groups of patients with different hormone receptor status, patients with positive and negative lymph node status and patients with different tumor grade (Table 4). We did not observe any association between estrogen hormone receptor status and the distribution of genotypes and frequency of alleles for four analyzed polymorphisms (data not shown). We did not observe any association between HER2 expression and the distribution of genotypes and frequency of alleles for any polymorphism (data not shown).
Table 4

The genotype, allele frequency and odds ratios (OR) of the c.-61 G>T polymorphism of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C polymorphism of the BLM gene in subjects with breast cancer with different clinical parameters

Genotype or allelePR receptor negative (n = 94)PR receptor positive (n = 167)OR (95 % Cl) p
NumberFrequencyNumberFrequency
RAD51 gene (c.-61 G>T)
 T/T470.50660.401.53 (0.91–2.55)0.102
 T/G410.44960.570.57 (0.34–0.95)↓0.032
 G/G60.0650.032.21 (0.66–7.44)0.201
 T1350.722280.681.25 (0.80–1.96)0.333
Genotype or alleleNode positive (n = 89)Node negative (n = 114)OR (95 % Cl) p
NumberFrequencyNumberFrequency
RAD51 gene (c.-61 G>T)
 T/T320.36570.500.56 (0.32–0.99)↓0.046
 T/G550.62530.461.86 (1.06–3.27)↑0.031
 T1190.671670.730.65 (0.39–1.09)0.101
Genotype or alleleG3 positive (n = 95)G3 negative (n = 104)OR (95 % Cl) p
NumberFrequencyNumberFrequency
BLM gene (g.96267 A>C)
 A/A230.24120.122.45 (1.14–5.25)↑0.021
 A/C720.76920.880.41 (0.19–0.88)↓0.021
 A1180.621160.561.30 (0.87–1.94)0.200
The genotype, allele frequency and odds ratios (OR) of the c.-61 G>T polymorphism of the RAD51 gene and the g.96267 A>C polymorphism of the BLM gene in subjects with breast cancer with different clinical parameters We did not observe any correlation between the g.38922 C>G polymorphism of the RAD51 gene and the g.85394 A>G and the g.96267 A>C polymorphisms of the BLM gene and lymph node status (data not shown). Next of the analyzed clinical features was the tumor grade described by Bloom-Richardson grading system (Table 4). We did not find any association between the c.-61 G>T and the g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene and the g.85394 A>G polymorphism of the BLM gene and tumor grade (data not shown).

Discussion

RAD51 recombinase and BLM helicase are the elements of the protein machinery performing DNA DSBs repair by homologous recombination [15]. Homologous recombination is initiated by the MRN complex (MRE11, RAD50, NBN) resecting the DSB ends to generate 3′ overhangs flanking the break site. The resulting ssDNA ends are first protected by RPA before eventually being coated with RAD51 protein to form the critical nucleoprotein filament necessary for accurate repair [11]. BLM helicase was identified in a large DNA damage surveillance complex with BRCA1 and MRN complex [28] and has been shown to associate with many homologous recombination proteins, such as topoisomerase IIIα, BLAP75/RMI1 and RAD51 [29]. Cell and biochemical studies have led to the view that BLM has both pro- and anti-recombinogenic functions. Most notable, BLM is important in stabilizing damaged replication forks and repressing aberrant recombination events, as evidenced by the dramatic increase in levels of sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs) and loss of heterozygosity in BLM null cells. In contrast, BLM is also predicted to promote homologous recombination by facilitating exonucleolytic resection of DSBs, by stimulating synthesis-dependent strand annealing, and by promoting non-crossover resolution of Holliday junctions [30]. Recently, it was shown that SUMOylation of BLM can affect its interactions with RAD51. SUMOylation of BLM facilitates repair of damaged replication forks by homologous recombination by modulating recruitment of RAD51 or retention at repair sites [31]. Defects in some DNA repair genes are associated with rare human cancer-prone disorders, like Bloom syndrome resulting from a mutation of the BLM gene, ataxia telangiectasia and Werner syndrom. Apart from these rare syndromes, deficient DNA repair is suggested as a predisposing factor in familial breast cancer and in some sporadic breast cancers [3-6]. Advances in the understating of genetic predispositions to breast cancer have also been made by screening naturally occurring polymorphisms in DNA repair genes [5, 22–27]. These studies revealed that subtle defects in DNA repair capacity arising from low-penetrance genes or their combinations are modified by other genetically determined or environmental factors and correlate to breast cancer risk. In the present study we correlated the genetic constitution of breast cancer patients expressed by polymorphic variants of two important homologous recombination genes, BLM and RAD51, with clinical parameters of patients, including lymph node status, tumor grade, hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone receptors) and epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression. The c.-61 G>T-RAD51 polymorphism is located in the 5′-untranslated region, the regulatory promoter element of the RAD51 gene. It could affect translation efficiency and mRNA stability, leading to changes in RAD51 protein levels, which, in turn, could influence on the activity of the multiprotein DNA-repair complex that includes BRCA1, BRCA2 and RAD51, and leads to breast cancer susceptibility. The g.38922 C>G-RAD51 polymorphism is located in the intron 10 in the RAD51 gene. The intron 10 is located between the exons in the core conserved domain that includes Walker A and B motifs, which have the function of ATP binding and hydrolysis activities. Because of the intron localization the g.38922 C>G polymorphism does not affect amino acid coding and therefore probably does not directly affect protein function but it is likely that may play a role in the proper recognition of non-coding element of RNA splicing and thus it may be indirectly responsible for the correct functioning of RAD51 protein. In turn, it could influence the activity of the multiprotein DNA-repair complex that includes BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51 and other proteins. On the other hand, the observed associations between breast cancer risk and the g.38922 C>G-RAD51 polymorphism can be interpreted as affecting the mRNA maturation process and in consequence activity of RAD51 protein. Beyond genotypes, the expression of genes or proteins might also play a role in breast cancer risk. RAD51 overexpression was associated with a higher risk of locoregional recurrence and death. RAD51 overexpression was also significantly associated with shorter locoregional recurrence-free survival and overall survival [32]. Moreover, it was shown, that RAD51 mRNA levels were inversely associated with PR status and the highest levels were detected in ER-positive/PR-negative tumors. The analysis of microarray expression data from 295 breast cancers indicate that RAD51 increased mRNA expression is associated with higher risk of tumor relapse, distant metastases and worst overall survival [33]. The g.96267 A>C polymorphism is located in the intron 20 and the g.85394 A>G polymorphism is located in the intron 17 of the BLM gene. These introns separate exons forming the evolutionarily preserved RecQ-like domain. This domain exhibits a high degree of homology with the RecQ protein of E. coli. RecQ-like domain and its constituent sub-domains are responsible for the most important functions of BLM helicase [34]. The polymorphic variant g.96267 A>C is located in the intron 20, which separates the exons encoding the HRDC domain (helicase and RNase D-like C-terminal domain), which in RecQ family-like helicases plays the role in recognizing and binding substrates and protein-protein interactions. In the case of BLM helicase, HRDC domain is also involved in the process of movement and developing of the Holliday structure. Therefore, it is likely that the polymorphic variants of the BLM gene g.96267 A>C and g.85394 A>G may play an important role in the proper recognition and cutting out introns in the process of mRNA maturation and may be responsible for the correct functioning of BLM helicase. Our results on the genes polymorphism and breast cancer risk are partly in agreement with the study presented by Ding et al. [26]. Comparing the results of Ding et al. carried out on population of women living in Taiwan to our results we simillarly observed a protective role of the A/C variant in the case of the g.96267 A>C polymorphism of the BLM gene (Table 3). On the other hand, our results disagree with those of Ding et al. in the case of the genotype the C/C of the g.38922 C>G polymorphism of the RAD51 gene (Table 3). It was shown that the polymorphic variant of the BLM gene − rs2380165 and the variants of the RAD51 gene – rs4417527 and rs2412546 were associated with breast cancer risk [26]. Moreover, not only the intronic polymorphisms located within the region encoding the helicase domain of BLM but also these within the RAD51-interaction domain-encoding region showed an interaction with RAD51 polymorphisms in determining breast cancer susceptibility. Recently, it was also shown that the domains responsible for RAD51 partnership coincide with the domains responsible for the binding of ssDNA, BLM100–214 and BLM1317–1367 [29]. This suggests that the ability of BLM to suppress homologous recombination may involve both the displacement of RAD51 from the D-loop and the binding of BLM to the newly liberated ssDNA to reinstate the duplex and completely impede genetic exchange through homologous recombination. In the present study we also correlated the genotype combinations of four polymorphic variants of the BLM and RAD51 genes with breast cancer occurrence (Table 3). Especially, in the case of analysis of genotype intergene combinations and breast cancer occurrence, we detected a high increase of cancer risk (Table 3). Relationship between the c.-61 G>T and g.38922 C>G polymorphisms of the RAD51 gene, and the g.91266 C>A and g.85394 A>G polymorphisms of the BLM gene and clinical characteristics of breast cancer patients was also studied (Table 4). Breast cancer patients were divided into groups depending on lymph node status, tumor grade and expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors (ER and PR) and HER2 receptor status. Auxiliary lymph node status and tumor size are clinical parameters directly correlated with the survival period in breast cancer. Expression level of ER and PR are useful predictive markers allowing the assessment of the response to endocrine therapy – ER- and PR-positive tumors may have a 6- to 7-higher response rate to negatives [35]. Next of the analyzed clinical features was the presence of HER2 (C-ERB/neu), belonging to the group of oncogenes of the tyrosine kinase function, which is overexpressed in about 20–30 % of breast cancers and often is associated with the resistance to a hormone therapy. Activation of this receptor leads to the uncontrolled division of cancer cells, which may be accompanied by an increased amount of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as the main factor inducing the formation of new blood vessels within the tumor. HER2 overexpression leads to early metastases in the direction of the lymph nodes, early recurrences of the disease and is associated with shorter survival and worse clinical prognosis [36]. We did not observe any association between HER2 expression and the distribution of genotypes and frequency of alleles within any of the analyzed polymorphisms (data not shown). We also correlated the genotypes of the BLM and RAD51 polymorphic variants with tumor grade described by the Bloom-Richardson grading system (Table 4). It is a three-step scale, according to which the tumor samples taken during biopsy are classified, and then analyzed using a microscope. To the G1 category belong tumors whose cells are small, have regular shapes, show high similarity in structural terms to normal breast cells and their mitotic index does not exceed the number of seventh. To the G2 category belong tumors whose cells exhibit visible changes compared to normal breast cells and their mitotic index ranges from 8 to 14. To the last G3 category belong tumors whose cells are large and have irregular shapes. They differ significantly from normal cells, divide rapidly − their mitotic index exceeds the number 15. The results obtained indicate that the RAD51 and BLM genes polymorphism can be associated with breast cancer risk. An association may be underlined by a common interaction between these genes. We showed that the c.-61 G>T polymorphism of the RAD51 gene might modulate breast cancer risk and be associated with progesterone receptor expression and local metastasis. We also found an association between the g.96267 A>C-BLM polymorphism and G3 grade of tumor.

Conclusion

The variability of the RAD51 and BLM genes may play a role in breast cancer occurrence. The examined polymorphisms of the RAD51 and BLM genes cannot be an independent markers of breast cancer but our studies may be useful in building a set of clinical and molecular markers helpful for diagnosis of breast cancer.
  36 in total

Review 1.  Rad51 recombinase and recombination mediators.

Authors:  Patrick Sung; Lumir Krejci; Stephen Van Komen; Michael G Sehorn
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2003-08-11       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Association between DNA damage, DNA repair genes variability and clinical characteristics in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Ewelina Synowiec; Joanna Stefanska; Zbigniew Morawiec; Janusz Blasiak; Katarzyna Wozniak
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2008-10-10       Impact factor: 2.433

Review 3.  Links between DNA double strand break repair and breast cancer: accumulating evidence from both familial and nonfamilial cases.

Authors:  Ranju Ralhan; Jatinder Kaur; Rolf Kreienberg; Lisa Wiesmüller
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2006-07-18       Impact factor: 8.679

Review 4.  ERBB2 oncogene in human breast cancer and its clinical significance.

Authors:  F Révillion; J Bonneterre; J P Peyrat
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 5.  Predicting endocrine therapy responsiveness in breast cancer.

Authors:  Cynthia X Ma; Cesar G Sanchez; Matthew J Ellis
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.990

6.  Breast cancer risk is associated with the genes encoding the DNA double-strand break repair Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex.

Authors:  Huan-Ming Hsu; Hui-Chun Wang; Sou-Tong Chen; Giu-Cheng Hsu; Chen-Yang Shen; Jyh-Cherng Yu
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  RecQ helicases: suppressors of tumorigenesis and premature aging.

Authors:  Csanád Z Bachrati; Ian D Hickson
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2003-09-15       Impact factor: 3.857

8.  SUMO modification regulates BLM and RAD51 interaction at damaged replication forks.

Authors:  Karen J Ouyang; Leslie L Woo; Jianmei Zhu; Dezheng Huo; Michael J Matunis; Nathan A Ellis
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 8.029

Review 9.  DNA double-strand break repair: from mechanistic understanding to cancer treatment.

Authors:  Thomas Helleday; Justin Lo; Dik C van Gent; Bevin P Engelward
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2007-03-23

10.  Human Rad51 mediated DNA unwinding is facilitated by conditions that favour Rad51-dsDNA aggregation.

Authors:  Kamakshi Balakrishnan; Neeraja M Krishnan; Anagha Kulkarni; Basuthkar J Rao
Journal:  BMC Biochem       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 4.059

View more
  10 in total

1.  Genome-wide haplotype association study identifies BLM as a risk gene for prostate cancer in Chinese population.

Authors:  Qun Wang; Hongchao Lv; Wenhua Lv; Miao Shi; Mingming Zhang; Meiwei Luan; Hongjie Zhu; Ruijie Zhang; Yongshuai Jiang
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2014-12-04

Review 2.  RecQ Helicase Somatic Alterations in Cancer.

Authors:  Megha K Thakkar; Jamie Lee; Stefan Meyer; Vivian Y Chang
Journal:  Front Mol Biosci       Date:  2022-06-15

3.  RAD51 135G>C substitution increases breast cancer risk in an ethnic-specific manner: a meta-analysis on 21,236 cases and 19,407 controls.

Authors:  Deepa Sekhar; Singh Pooja; Sandeep Kumar; Singh Rajender
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Investigating the pathogenic SNPs in BLM helicase and their biological consequences by computational approach.

Authors:  Faisal A Alzahrani; Firoz Ahmed; Monika Sharma; Mohd Rehan; Maryam Mahfuz; Mohammed N Baeshen; Yousef Hawsawi; Ahmed Almatrafi; Suliman Abdallah Alsagaby; Mohammad Azhar Kamal; Mohiuddin Khan Warsi; Hani Choudhry; Mohammad Sarwar Jamal
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Zscan5b Deficiency Impairs DNA Damage Response and Causes Chromosomal Aberrations during Mitosis.

Authors:  Seiji Ogawa; Mitsutoshi Yamada; Akihiro Nakamura; Tohru Sugawara; Akari Nakamura; Shoko Miyajima; Yuichirou Harada; Reina Ooka; Ryuichiro Okawa; Jun Miyauchi; Hideki Tsumura; Yasunori Yoshimura; Kenji Miyado; Hidenori Akutsu; Mamoru Tanaka; Akihiro Umezawa; Toshio Hamatani
Journal:  Stem Cell Reports       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 7.765

6.  A multiple genomic data fused SF2 prediction model, signature identification, and gene regulatory network inference for personalized radiotherapy.

Authors:  Qi-En He; Yi-Fan Tong; Zhou Ye; Li-Xia Gao; Yi-Zhi Zhang; Ling Wang; Kai Song
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec

7.  A 23-gene prognostic classifier for prediction of recurrence and survival for Asian breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Ting-Hao Chen; Jian-Ying Chiu; Kuan-Hui Shih
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  A Large Case-Control Study Performed in Spanish Population Suggests That RECQL5 Is the Only RECQ Helicase Involved in Breast Cancer Susceptibility.

Authors:  Erik Michel Marchena-Perea; Milton Eduardo Salazar-Hidalgo; Alicia Gómez-Sanz; Mónica Arranz-Ledo; Alicia Barroso; Victoria Fernández; Hugo Tejera-Pérez; Guillermo Pita; Rocío Núñez-Torres; Luz Pombo; Rafael Morales-Chamorro; Juana María Cano-Cano; Maria Del Carmen Soriano; Pilar Garre; Mercedes Durán; María Currás-Freixes; Miguel de la Hoya; Ana Osorio
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 6.575

9.  Multiple susceptibility loci for radiation-induced mammary tumorigenesis in F2[Dahl S x R]-intercross rats.

Authors:  Victoria L Herrera; Lorenz R Ponce; Nelson Ruiz-Opazo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Rad51 paralogs and the risk of unselected breast cancer: A case-control study.

Authors:  Peter Grešner; Ewa Jabłońska; Jolanta Gromadzińska
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.