| Literature DB >> 24498107 |
Deirdre P Cronin-Fenton1, Mariann Christensen2, Timothy L Lash3, Thomas P Ahern4, Lars Pedersen1, Jens Peter Garne5, Marianne Ewertz6, Herman Autrup7, Henrik T Sørensen1, Stephen Hamilton-Dutoit2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD) inhibits oxidative damage and cancer therapy effectiveness. A polymorphism in its encoding gene (SOD2: Val16Ala rs4880) may confer poorer breast cancer survival, but data are inconsistent. We examined the association of SOD2 genotype and breast cancer recurrence (BCR) among patients treated with cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy (Cyclo). We compared our findings with published studies using meta-analyses.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24498107 PMCID: PMC3909115 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087450
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Design used to identify the study sample.
The source population consisted of 10,367 female residents of the Jutland Peninsula in Denmark aged 35–69 years who were diagnosed with stage I, II, or III breast cancer between 1990 and 2001. Most of the women were excluded because of unknown protocol or death within the first year after diagnosis (n = 9,551). Genotyping results were missing for a small proportion of patients due to unavailable tumor blocks or indeterminate assay results.
Frequency of patients with breast cancer recurrence (n = 118) and matched controls (n = 213), by clinical characteristics, among women aged 35 to 69 years at the time of breast cancer diagnosis who resided in Jutland, Denmark, 1991–2001.
| Category | Subcategory | Cases (n,%) | Controls (n,%) |
|
| |||
| 35–44 | 49 (42) | 84 (39) | |
| 45–54 | 55 (47) | 106 (50) | |
| 55–64 | 8 (6.8) | 18 (8.5) | |
| 65–69 | 6 (5.1) | 5 (2.3) | |
|
| |||
| Premenopausal | 95 (81) | 187 (88) | |
| Postmenopausal | 23 (19) | 26 (12) | |
|
| |||
| I | 11 (9.3) | 25 (12) | |
| II | 49 (42) | 86 (40) | |
| III | 58 (49) | 102 (48) | |
|
| |||
| Poorˆ | 72 (61) | 119 (56) | |
| Positive | 46 (39) | 94 (44) | |
|
| |||
| Mastectomy | 99 (84) | 162 (76) | |
| Breast conserving surgery | 19 (16) | 51 (24) | |
|
| |||
| No | 35 (30) | 61 (29) | |
| Yes | 83 (70) | 152 (71) | |
|
| |||
| CEF | 74 (63) | 113 (53) | |
| CEF+PAM | 12 (10) | 22 (10) | |
| CEF+TAM§ | 31 (26) | 78 (37) | |
| CEF+TAM+HER¤ | 1 (0.9) | 0 | |
|
| |||
| DBCG89 | 55 (47) | 86 (40) | |
| DBCG99 | 63 (53) | 127 (60) |
PAM = pamidronate; §TAM = tamoxifen; ¤HER = Herceptin; ?ER ”poor” refers to <10% ER positivity as per the diagnostic period of patients included in the current study.
Observed and expected allelic frequency and Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE).
| Wildtype | Heterozygote | Variant | |
|
| 32 | 44 | 25 |
|
| 29 | 50 | 22 |
|
|
| ||
Association between MnSOD (SOD2) genotype and breast cancer recurrence among women who received cyclophosphamide-epirubicin-5-fluorouracil (CEF) adjuvant chemotherapy; women aged 35 to 69 years at breast cancer diagnosis who resided in Jutland, Denmark, 1991–2001.
| Cases | Controls | Matched | Adjusted | |
|
| ||||
|
| 35 (30) | 66 (32) | 1.0 | 1.0 |
|
| 47 (40) | 91 (44) | 1.1 (0.67, 2.0) | 1.1 (0.65, 2.0) |
|
| 35 (30) | 52 (25) | 0.82 (0.44, 1.5) | 0.87 (0.47, 1.6) |
| Unknown | 1 (1) | 4 (2) | – | – |
|
| ||||
|
| 82 (70) | 157 (75) | 1.0 | 1.0 |
|
| 35 (30) | 52 (25) | 0.76 (0.45, 1.3) | 0.81 (0.47, 1.4) |
|
| 1 (1) | 4 (2) | – | – |
Conditioned on the matched factors.
Adjusted for surgery type, type of adjuvant treatment (i.e., CEF +/− pamidronate, tamoxifen, herceptin) and radiation therapy.
Figure 2Selection of studies for inclusion in qualitative and quantitative review.
Figure 3Summary relative effect size (ES) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for the association between inheritance of (3a) two SOD2 Ala alleles (recessive model) versus heterozygote or homozygote wild-type allele and (3b) inheritance of any SOD2 Ala allele (dominant model) (homozygote or heterozygote Ala allele) versus homozygote wild-type (Val/Val) and breast cancer outcome.
Summary effect size and 95% CI were estimated using a random-effects meta-analytic model. The size of each square is proportional to the corresponding study’s weight. The horizontal lines represent the confidence intervals. The diamond represents the summary effect size and 95%CI. *.