| Literature DB >> 24078348 |
Adrianna Mostowska, Piotr Pawlik, Stefan Sajdak, Janina Markowska, Monika Pawałowska, Margarita Lianeri, Paweł P Jagodzinski.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24078348 PMCID: PMC3899496 DOI: 10.1007/s40291-013-0059-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Diagn Ther ISSN: 1177-1062 Impact factor: 4.074
Clinical characteristics of ovarian cancer patients and healthy controls
| Characteristic | Patients ( | Controls ( |
|---|---|---|
| Mean age (years) ± SD | 58.4 ± 9.7 | 57.4 ± 7.5 |
| Histological grade | ||
| G1 | 83 (32.2 %) | |
| G2 | 85 (32.9 %) | |
| G3 | 90 (34.9 %) | |
| Gx | 0 (0.0 %) | |
| Clinical stage | ||
| I | 96 (37.2 %) | |
| II | 40 (15.5 %) | |
| III | 88 (34.1 %) | |
| IV | 34 (13.2 %) | |
| Histological type | ||
| Serous | 90 (34.9 %) | |
| Mucinous | 30 (11.6 %) | |
| Endometrioid | 48 (18.6 %) | |
| Clear cell | 24 (9.3 %) | |
| Brenne | 0 (0.0 %) | |
| Mixed | 22 (8.5 %) | |
| Solid | 18 (7.0 %) | |
| Untyped carcinoma | 26 (10.1 %) |
Data are given as no. (%) unless otherwise stated
Association of polymorphic variants of CTNNB1, APC, and AXIN2 with the risk of ovarian cancer
| Gene | rs no. | Allelesa | MAFb | Genotypes casesc | Genotypes controlsc |
|
|
| ORdominant (95 % CI)d; | ORrecessive (95 % CI)e; |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| rs4533622 | a/C | 0.46 | 78/113/37 | 90/122/70 | 0.057 | 0.092 | 0.082 | 0.901 (0.622–1.306); 0.583 | 0.587 (0.376–0.915); 0.018 |
|
| rs2953 | g/T | 0.46 | 78/113/37 | 90/122/70 | 0.057 | 0.092 | 0.082 | 0.901 (0.622–1.306); 0.583 | 0.587 (0.376–0.915); 0.018 |
|
| rs11954856 | g/T | 0.48 | 35/129/63 | 76/141/64 | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| 1.302 (0.871–1.948); 0.198 |
|
| rs351771 | c/T | 0.45 | 88/114/26 | 86/139/57 | 0.015 |
|
| 0.698 (0.483–1.009); 0.055 | 0.508 (0.308–0.839); 0.007 |
|
| rs459552 | a/T | 0.30 | 129/86/13 | 142/108/32 | 0.064 | 0.041 | 0.034 | 0.778 (0.548–1.106); 0.161 | 0.472 (0.242–0.923); 0.025 |
|
| rs4074947 | C/t | 0.19 | 137/80/10 | 182/89/10 | 0.577 | 0.298 | 0.302 | 1.208 (0.841–1.734); 0.306 | 1.249 (0.510–3.056); 0.626 |
|
| rs7224837 | A/g | 0.15 | 161/61/6 | 203/71/8 | 0.917 | 0.801 | 0.799 | 1.069 (0.727–1.573); 0.733 | 0.926 (0.316–2.708); 0.888 |
|
| rs3923087 | a/G | 0.22 | 133/84/10 | 171/97/14 | 0.814 | 0.775 | 0.777 | 1.089 (0.763–1.555); 0.640 | 0.882 (0.384–2.026); 0.767 |
|
| rs2240308 | A/g | 0.49 | 67/115/46 | 71/146/65 | 0.510 | 0.254 | 0.260 | 0.809 (0.546–1.197); 0.288 | 0.844 (0.551–1.292); 0.434 |
Statistically significant results are highlighted in bold
Experiment-wide significance threshold required to keep Type I error rate at 5 % (Nyholt correction): 0.006 (effective number of independent marker loci: 8.388)
MAF minor allele frequency, OR odds ratio, p p values of the trend test
aUppercase denotes the more frequent allele in the control samples
bCalculated from the control samples
cThe order of genotypes: DD/Dd/dd (d is the minor allele in the control samples)
dDominant model: dd + Dd vs. DD (d is the minor allele)
eRecessive model: dd vs. Dd + DD (d is the minor allele)
Results of haplotype analysis of the CTNNB1, APC, and AXIN2 genes in patients with ovarian cancer
| Polymorphisms | χ2 | Global |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| rs4533622_rs2953 | 3.038 | 0.386 |
|
| ||
| rs11954856_rs351771 | 9.352 | 0.025 |
| rs351771_rs459552 | 6.945 | 0.074 |
| rs11954856_rs351771_rs459552 | 11.141 | 0.133 |
|
| ||
| rs4074947_rs7224837 | 1.702 | 0.636 |
| rs7224837_rs3923087 | 0.245 | 0.970 |
| rs3923087_rs2240308 | 2.976 | 0.395 |
| rs4074947_rs7224837_rs3923087 | 1.739 | 0.973 |
| rs7224837_rs3923087_rs2240308 | 4.037 | 0.775 |
| rs4074947_rs7224837_rs3923087_rs2240308 | 7.383 | 0.946 |
χ Chi-square
aEmpirical 5 % quantile of the best p value: 0.03904
bEmpirical 5 % quantile of the best p value: 0.00748
cEmpirical 5 % quantile of the best p value: 0.00888
Results of gene–gene interactions analyzed by multifactor dimensionality reduction method
| Polymorphisms | Testing balanced accuracy | Cross validation consistency (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.5418 | 60 | 0.356 |
|
| 0.5041 | 50 | 0.828 |
|
| 0.5719 | 100 | 0.068 |
aSignificance of accuracy (empirical p value based on 1,000 permutations)