Literature DB >> 25799222

Association between GWAS-identified genetic variations and disease prognosis for patients with colorectal cancer.

Byung Woog Kang1, Hyo-Sung Jeon2, Yee Soo Chae1, Soo Jung Lee1, Jae Yong Park3, Jin Eun Choi4, Jun Seok Park5, Gyu Seog Choi5, Jong Gwang Kim1.   

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have already identified at least 22 common susceptibility loci associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). This study examined the relationship between these single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and the clinical outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer. Seven hundred seventy-six patients with surgically resected colorectal adenocarcinoma were enrolled in the present study. Twenty-two of the GWAS-identified SNPs were genotyped using a Sequenom MassARRAY. Among the 22 SNPs, two (rs1321311G>T in CDKN1A and rs10411210C>T in RHPN2) were significantly associated with the survival outcomes of CRC in a multivariate survival analysis. In a recessive model, the rs1321311 TT genotype (vs. GG + GT) and rs10411210 TT genotype (vs. CC + CT) were associated with a worse prognosis for disease-free survival (adjusted HR = 1.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.00-3.60; P = 0.050, adjusted HR = 1.94; 95% confidence interval = 1.05-3.57; P = 0.034, respectively) and overall survival (adjusted HR = 2.05; 95% confidence interval = 1.00-4.20; P = 0.049, adjusted HR = 2.06; 95% confidence interval = 1.05-4.05; P = 0.036, respectively). None of the other SNPs was significantly associated with any clinicopathologic features or survival. The present results suggest that the genetic variants of the CDKN1A (rs1321311) and RHPN2 (rs10411210) genes can be used as prognostic biomarkers for patients with surgically resected colorectal cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25799222      PMCID: PMC4370892          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119649

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Although the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in resected colorectal cancer (CRC) has already been established by several studies, 40% of patients experience local or distant recurrences even after curative resection [1]. In particular, the heterogeneity of CRC is considered one of major difficulties for choosing treatments and the effect of chemotherapy seems to vary depending on the tumor biology. Thus, a clinical or biologic biomarker that predicts recurrence, survival, or response patterns to chemotherapy is needed for patients with resected CRC. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have already been widely implicated in cancer development, prognosis, and treatment response. Recent advances using genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have enabled the identification of multiple CRC-related SNPs [2-8]. Notwithstanding, various studies have also reported that genetic variants generated from candidate gene or pathway-based studies are associated with the clinical outcome of CRC patients, which can be used to categorize patients with different survival or responses to specific treatments. However, no GWAS has yet examined the direct relationship between genetic variations and the survival of CRC patients. Three studies have examined the relationship between GWAS-identified CRC risk variants and the clinical outcomes of CRC, yet two were performed with a small sample size and the third was focused on Caucasian populations, which differ from other ethnic groups [9-11]. Accordingly, the present study examined the relationship between GWAS-identified genetic variants and the clinical outcomes of a relatively large group of Korean CRC patients.

Materials and Methods

Study population

The tissues investigated in this study were obtained from 776 Korean patients who underwent a curative surgical resection between May, 2001 and May, 2008 at Kyungpook National University Hospital (Daegu, Korea). Medical records were retrospectively reviewed to identify the relationship between GWAS-identified genetic variants and the clinical outcomes. In brief, the study included patients with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum who underwent curative surgery but did not receive neoadjuvant therapy before surgery. Each patient was examined every 3 to 6 months for the first three years following the diagnosis of CRC, and every year thereafter, in accordance with the national guidelines. Written informed consent for genetic analysis including gene expression and SNP genotyping was received from all the patients before surgery, and the study was approved by the Institutional Research Board at Kyungpook National University Hospital. The CRC diagnosis and staging were assessed according to the WHO classifications and TMN classifications from the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC).

SNP selection and genotyping

Thirty-five polymorphisms associated with CRC susceptibility were selected from the US National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) Catalog of Published Genome-Wide Association Studies (as accessed in March 2013). Among these 35 polymorphisms, 22 polymorphisms were applied in this study, while the others were excluded for the following reasons: the minor allele frequency was ≤ 5% in the HapMap JPT data of the public SNP database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP) or the SNPs could not be applied to the SEQUENOM’s MassARRAY platform. All the obtained tissues were immediately snapped frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored -80°C until the relevant experiments were conducted. The genomic DNA was extracted from fresh colorectal mucosal tissue at the time of surgery using a QIAamp genomic DNA kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The genotype analysis was performed using SEQUENOM’s MassARRAY iPLEX assay according to the instructions of the manufacturer. To validate the genotyping, approximately 5% of samples were randomly selected for re-genotyping using a sequencing method or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) assay by a different investigator and the results were 100% concordant.

Statistical analysis

The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was tested using a goodness-of-fit χ2 test with 1 df. The genotypes for each SNP were analyzed as a three-group categorical variable (referent model), and also grouped according to a dominant and recessive model. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the day of surgery to the date of the last follow-up or date of death. Disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated from the day of surgery until recurrence or death from any cause. The survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The differences in OS or DFS according to the SNPs were compared using log-rank tests. Cox’s proportional hazard regression model was used for the multivariate survival analyses, which were always adjusted for age (< 64 versus ≥ 64 years), the preoperative CEA level (normal versus elevated), differentiation (well and moderate versus poorly), sex (male versus female), primary site (colon versus rectum), and stage (I to III). The proportional hazards assumption was checked and all graphs for the log-log survivor functions of the two SNP aid groups (rs10411210 and rs1321311) were parallel except for DFS graph of rs10411210. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were also estimated. A cut-off P value of 0.05 (two-sided) was adopted for all the statistical analyses. The statistical data were obtained using an SPSS software package (SPSS 11.5 Inc. Chicago, IL, USA) or SAS Genetic software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

Results

Patient and disease characteristics

The clinical and pathologic characteristics of the patients are listed in Table 1. The median age was 64 years (range 21–89), 444 (57.2%) patients were diagnosed with colon cancer, and 327 (42.1%) patients had rectal cancer. The pathologic stages after surgical resection were as follows: stage I (N = 141, 18.2%), stage II (N = 318, 41.0%), and stage III (N = 317, 40.9%). Among the 635 patients with stage II or III diseases, 570 patients (89.8%) received adjuvant chemotherapy based on 6 cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin ± radiotherapy (390), 12 cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (n = 67), 8 cycles of capecitabine (n = 41), or doxifluridine for 1 year (n = 72).
Table 1

Patient characteristics (N = 776).

Variables N %
Age, median (years)64
 <6437848.7
 ≥6439851.3
Sex
 Male43255.7
 Female34444.3
Primary site
 Colon44457.2
 Rectum32742.1
 Colon+ Rectum50.6
Histological differentiation
 Well9412.1
 Moderate65684.6
 Poor or signet ring263.4
CEA
 Normal64282.7
 Elevated13417.3
CA19–9
 Normal67587.0
 Elevated10113.0
Pathologic stage a
 I14118.2
 II31841.0
 III31740.9
Relapse
 No54570.2
 Yes23129.8
Death
 No59376.4
 Yes18323.6

a the 7th AJCC staging system

a the 7th AJCC staging system

Overall treatment outcomes

At the last overall analysis (December 2012), 231 patients had experienced a disease relapse, 163 patients had died as a result of CRC, and 20 patients had died from causes unrelated to CRC. At the median follow-up duration of 78.5 months, the estimated 5-year OS and DFS for all the patients was 83.1% and 76.0% respectively, plus the survival differed according to the stage (P<0.001).

Genotype frequencies and effects on survival

The frequencies of each genotype are shown in Table 2 and were confirmed to be in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (P>0.05). Among the 22 SNPs (S1 Table and S2 Table), two SNPs (rs1321311G>T in Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1A (CDKN1A) and rs10411210C>T in Rho GTPase binding protein 2 (RHPN2) were found to be significantly associated with the survival outcomes of CRC in the multivariate survival analysis. In the recessive model, the rs1321311 TT genotype (vs. GG + GT) and rs10411210 TT genotype (vs. CC + CT) were associated with a worse prognosis for DFS (adjusted HR = 1.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.00–3.60; P = 0.050, adjusted HR = 1.94; 95% confidence interval = 1.05–3.57; P = 0.034, respectively) and OS (adjusted HR = 2.05; 95% confidence interval = 1.00–4.20; P = 0.049, adjusted HR = 2.06; 95% confidence interval = 1.05–4.05; P = 0.036, respectively) (Table 3 and Fig. 1). None of the other SNPs was significantly associated with survival. With regard to clinicopathologic parameters, age (adjusted HR for DFS = 1.77; P<0.001, adjusted HR for OS = 2.56; P<0.001), preoperative CEA level (adjusted HR for DFS = 1.81; P<0.001, adjusted HR for OS = 1.78; P = 0.002), and pathologic stage (adjusted HR for DFS = 2.75; P<0.001, adjusted HR for OS = 2.49; P<0.001) were identified as significantly associated with DFS and OS (Table 3).
Table 2

Information and genotypes of 22 polymorphisms.

rsIDBase changeChromosomeGenePosition123MAF HWE-P
rs10411210C/T19RHPN219q13.11527 (68.8)214 (27.9)25 (3.3)0.1720.568
rs10795668G/A10KRT8P16—TCEB1P310p14348 (45.1)336 (43.5)88 (11.4)0.3320.614
rs10936599T/C3MYNN3q26.2266 (34.3)372 (48)137 (17.7)0.4170.725
rs11169552C/T12DIP2B, ATF112q13.12334 (44.7)334 (44.7)79 (10.6)0.3290.739
rs1321311G/T6SRSF3—CDKN1A6p21.2534 (71.7)189 (25.4)22 (3)0.1560.294
rs3802842A/C11C11orf9311q23.1237 (30.7)397 (51.4)139 (18)0.4370.222
rs3824999A/C11POLD311q13.4284 (36.8)365 (47.3)122 (15.8)0.3950.793
rs4444235C/T14RPS3AP46—BMP414q22.2249 (32.2)367 (47.5)157 (20.3)0.4400.306
rs4779584T/C15SCG5—GREM115q13.3551 (73)182 (24.1)22 (2.9)0.1500.146
rs4939827C/T18SMAD718q21.1448 (57.7)279 (36)49 (6.3)0.2430.531
rs5934683T/CXGPR143—SHROOM2Xp22.2642 (83.4)79 (10.3)49 (6.4)0.1150.123
rs6687758A/G1DUSP10—CICP131q41384 (49.7)321 (41.5)68 (8.8)0.2960.937
rs6983267T/G8SRRM1P1—POU5F1B8q24.21205 (27.7)394 (53.2)141 (19.1)0.4570.047
rs7014346G/A8SRRM1P1—POU5F1B8q24.21355 (46.2)348 (45.3)65 (8.5)0.3110.114
rs7758229G/T6SLC22A36q25.3451 (58.5)277 (35.9)43 (5.6)0.2350.956
rs9929218G/A16CDH116q22.1570 (73.5)193 (24.9)13 (1.7)0.1410.468
rs10505477T/C8SRRM1P1—POU5F1B8q24.21149 (19.6)385 (50.7)226 (29.7)0.4490.514
rs11903757T/C2NABP1—SDPR2q32.3682 (91.2)65 (8.7)1 (0.1)0.0450.669
rs2057314T/C6DCBLD16q22.1228 (30)378 (49.7)155 (20.4)0.4520.942
rs7136702T/C12N/A12q13223 (29.3)365 (47.9)174 (22.8)0.4680.294
rs7315438C/T12TBX3—UBA52P712q24.21260 (34.6)364 (48.5)127 (16.9)0.4110.983
rs961253C/A20TARDBPP1—BMP220p12.3605 (80)143 (18.9)8 (1.1)0.1050.889
Table 3

Multivariate analysis for survival.

DFSOS
P-valueHR95% CI P-valueHR95% CI
Age, ≥64 years 4.6×10 –5 1.77 1.35–2.34 1.2×10 –8 2.56 1.85–3.53
Male sex0.3361.230.95–1.610.2941.460.81–1.97
CEA, elevated 2.0×10 –4 1.81 1.32–2.48 0.002 1.78 1.25–2.55
Stage, II/III 6.6×10 –13 2.75 2.09–3.63 7.8×10 –9 2.49 1.82–3.39
Differentiation, well/moderate0.4510.710.29–1.730.5690.750.28–2.03
Primary site, colon0.1420.890.48–1.210.1110.770.51–1.92
CDKN1A (rs1321311), TT vs.CC/CT 0.050 1.90 1.00–3.60 0.049 2.05 1.00–4.20
RHPN2(rs10411210), TT vs.GG/GT 0.034 1.94 1.05–3.57 0.036 2.06 1.05–4.05
Fig 1

Survival curves according to genotype in combined analysis: CDKN1A rs1321311 (A) and RHPN2 rs10411210 (B).

P values correspond to multivariate Cox model adjusted for age, CEA level, differentiation, sex, primary site, and pathologic stage.

Survival curves according to genotype in combined analysis: CDKN1A rs1321311 (A) and RHPN2 rs10411210 (B).

P values correspond to multivariate Cox model adjusted for age, CEA level, differentiation, sex, primary site, and pathologic stage.

Discussion

The prognostic impact of GWAS-identified genetic variants was investigated in CRC patients who had been surgically treated with curative intent. As a result, the current study demonstrated that the CDKN1A rs1321311 and RHPN2 rs10411210 polymorphisms among the 22 selected variants were significantly associated with survival after adjusting for clinical and pathologic factors. A GWAS is an investigation of many common genetic variants in different individuals to discover if any variant is associated with a specific trait. GWASs have already been actively applied to explore disease susceptibility, prognosis, and drug response prediction [12]. To date, three recent studies have examined the relationship between GWAS-identified CRC risk variants and the clinical outcomes of CRC [9-11]. In Western countries, Phipps et al. examined the relationship between GWAS-identified variants and survival of the 2611 CRC patients, and found a strong association between a SNP (rs4939827) in the SMAD 7 gene and reduced disease-specific survival and OS [10]. Another study based on Western populations evaluated the survival results of 285 stage II or III CRC patients receiving fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, and found an association between one SNP (rs10318) and the recurrence of stage II and between three SNPs (rs10749971, rs961253, and rs355527) and the recurrence of stage III [9]. However, the influence of ethnic variations should also be considered when interpreting the prognostic impact of GWAS-identified variants [13]. Thus, a recent study by Xing et al. reported an association between two variants (rs4779584 and rs10795668) and a reduced risk of survival and a marginal effect between rs10795668 and chemotherapy in 380 Chinese CRC patients [11]. Notwithstanding, there are several important differences between the data in the present study and that in previous CRC prognostic studies. First, given the homogeneous ethnic background of Korean patients, any potential confounding effect due to ethnicity is likely to be small in the current study. Moreover, this study included a relatively large number of patients. Furthermore, the adjuvant treatment application was consistent and the loss to follow-up was very low. However, even though the present data identified certain gene variants as a statistically significant prognostic factor for survival in operated CRC, these results should be interpreted cautiously. Considering multiple comparison issue, we cannot rule out the possibility of a type I error in the analysis of individual SNP. Therefore, additional studies with larger sample sizes are required. For the current study, the TT genotype of CDKN1A rs1321311 was significantly associated with worse survival outcomes. CDKN1A is a conserved protein belong to the CDK inhibitor Cip/Kip family, that has been implicated in cell cycle regulation [14]. In particular, this molecule is known to be involved in the regulation of fundamental cellular programs, such as cell proliferation, differentiation, migration, senescence, and apoptosis [15]. Although its mechanism and effect on cancer are still unknown, several reports have indicated that CDKN1A may be a biologic predictor and beneficial target for cancer treatment using cell cycle alteration [16]. Interestingly, several previous studies have demonstrated an association between a decreased expression of CDKN1A and the recurrence of stage II CRC, along with tumor suppression function in the colon of CDKN1A-deficient mice [17,18]. Therefore, the above findings suggest that CDKN1A can be a possible biomarker for CRC. Dunlop et al. also performed a GWAS meta-analysis to identify common variants influencing CRC risk, including 29778 cases and 29204 controls, and found a strong association between the CDKN1A (rs1321311) polymorphism and an increased CRC risk [19]. Similarly, the current study also found an association between the TT genotype and an association with a worse survival. However, there is no previous data on the prognostic role of CDKN1A (rs1321311) polymorphisms in CRC. In patients with head and neck cancer, the CT/TT genotype has been associated with a worse second primary malignancy risk than the CC genotype [20]. Another finding from the present study was a significant association between the RHPN2 rs10411210 TT genotype and poor survival outcomes in patients with surgically resected CRC. RHPN2 is a master regulator of actin cytoskeleton rearrangement and plays a role in various actin-modulating protein targets [21]. Yet, despite increasing evidence that RHPN2 plays important roles in several aspects of tumorigenesis and cancer progression, it is still unclear whether the polymorphism itself alters the function of the protein expression [22]. Indeed, several GWASs have already established a significant association between the RHPN2 polymorphism and an increased risk of CRC [3,23,24]. Thus, the association between CRC risk and the TT genotype is consistent across these studies. However, such previous studies have only focused on the risk of CRC, and not the impact on the survival outcomes of CRC. Consequently, the present results show that the role of the RHPN2 polymorphism still requires further clarification for predicting the prognosis of CRC. In conclusion, the current findings indicated that genetic variations of CDKN1A and RHPN2 may influence the prognosis for CRC. However, since the exact mechanism and function of these gene variants have not yet been fully defined, the present findings need to be confirmed in further studies with other populations in order to clarify the association between these polymorphisms and the prognosis of CRC.

Information of 22 genotypes for overall survival and disease-free survival

. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.

Information of 22 genotypes for overall survival and disease-free survival adjusted to multiple comparison correction

. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  24 in total

1.  GWAS-identified colorectal cancer susceptibility loci associated with clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Jingyao Dai; Jian Gu; Maosheng Huang; Cathy Eng; E Scott Kopetz; Lee M Ellis; Ernest Hawk; Xifeng Wu
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 4.944

2.  A genome-wide association study shows that common alleles of SMAD7 influence colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Peter Broderick; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Alan M Pittman; Emily Webb; Kimberley Howarth; Andrew Rowan; Steven Lubbe; Sarah Spain; Kate Sullivan; Sarah Fielding; Emma Jaeger; Jayaram Vijayakrishnan; Zoe Kemp; Maggie Gorman; Ian Chandler; Elli Papaemmanuil; Steven Penegar; Wendy Wood; Gabrielle Sellick; Mobshra Qureshi; Ana Teixeira; Enric Domingo; Ella Barclay; Lynn Martin; Oliver Sieber; David Kerr; Richard Gray; Julian Peto; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; Ian Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2007-10-14       Impact factor: 38.330

Review 3.  Implications of genome-wide association studies in cancer therapeutics.

Authors:  Jai N Patel; Howard L McLeod; Federico Innocenti
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Genome-wide association scan identifies a colorectal cancer susceptibility locus on 11q23 and replicates risk loci at 8q24 and 18q21.

Authors:  Albert Tenesa; Susan M Farrington; James G D Prendergast; Mary E Porteous; Marion Walker; Naila Haq; Rebecca A Barnetson; Evropi Theodoratou; Roseanne Cetnarskyj; Nicola Cartwright; Colin Semple; Andrew J Clark; Fiona J L Reid; Lorna A Smith; Kostas Kavoussanakis; Thibaud Koessler; Paul D P Pharoah; Stephan Buch; Clemens Schafmayer; Jürgen Tepel; Stefan Schreiber; Henry Völzke; Carsten O Schmidt; Jochen Hampe; Jenny Chang-Claude; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner; Stefan Wilkening; Federico Canzian; Gabriel Capella; Victor Moreno; Ian J Deary; John M Starr; Ian P M Tomlinson; Zoe Kemp; Kimberley Howarth; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Emily Webb; Peter Broderick; Jayaram Vijayakrishnan; Richard S Houlston; Gad Rennert; Dennis Ballinger; Laura Rozek; Stephen B Gruber; Koichi Matsuda; Tomohide Kidokoro; Yusuke Nakamura; Brent W Zanke; Celia M T Greenwood; Jagadish Rangrej; Rafal Kustra; Alexandre Montpetit; Thomas J Hudson; Steven Gallinger; Harry Campbell; Malcolm G Dunlop
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2008-03-30       Impact factor: 38.330

Review 5.  The prognostic significance of altered cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors in human cancer.

Authors:  J Tsihlias; L Kapusta; J Slingerland
Journal:  Annu Rev Med       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 13.739

6.  The RhoA-binding protein, rhophilin-2, regulates actin cytoskeleton organization.

Authors:  Jeremy W Peck; Michael Oberst; Kerrie B Bouker; Emma Bowden; Peter D Burbelo
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2002-09-06       Impact factor: 5.157

7.  Tumor suppressor functions for the Cdk inhibitor p21 in the mouse colon.

Authors:  Aleksandra Jovanovic Poole; Darien Heap; Robert E Carroll; Angela L Tyner
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 9.867

8.  Common genetic variants at the CRAC1 (HMPS) locus on chromosome 15q13.3 influence colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Emma Jaeger; Emily Webb; Kimberley Howarth; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Andrew Rowan; Peter Broderick; Axel Walther; Sarah Spain; Alan Pittman; Zoe Kemp; Kate Sullivan; Karl Heinimann; Steven Lubbe; Enric Domingo; Ella Barclay; Lynn Martin; Maggie Gorman; Ian Chandler; Jayaram Vijayakrishnan; Wendy Wood; Elli Papaemmanuil; Steven Penegar; Mobshra Qureshi; Susan Farrington; Albert Tenesa; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; David Kerr; Richard Gray; Julian Peto; Malcolm Dunlop; Harry Campbell; Huw Thomas; Richard Houlston; Ian Tomlinson
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2007-12-16       Impact factor: 38.330

9.  Common variation near CDKN1A, POLD3 and SHROOM2 influences colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Malcolm G Dunlop; Sara E Dobbins; Susan Mary Farrington; Angela M Jones; Claire Palles; Nicola Whiffin; Albert Tenesa; Sarah Spain; Peter Broderick; Li-Yin Ooi; Enric Domingo; Claire Smillie; Marc Henrion; Matthew Frampton; Lynn Martin; Graeme Grimes; Maggie Gorman; Colin Semple; Yusanne P Ma; Ella Barclay; James Prendergast; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; Bianca Olver; Steven Penegar; Steven Lubbe; Ian Chander; Luis G Carvajal-Carmona; Stephane Ballereau; Amy Lloyd; Jayaram Vijayakrishnan; Lina Zgaga; Igor Rudan; Evropi Theodoratou; John M Starr; Ian Deary; Iva Kirac; Dujo Kovacević; Lauri A Aaltonen; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Koichi Matsuda; Yusuke Nakamura; Yukinori Okada; Steven Gallinger; David J Duggan; David Conti; Polly Newcomb; John Hopper; Mark A Jenkins; Fredrick Schumacher; Graham Casey; Douglas Easton; Mitul Shah; Paul Pharoah; Annika Lindblom; Tao Liu; Christopher G Smith; Hannah West; Jeremy P Cheadle; Rachel Midgley; David J Kerr; Harry Campbell; Ian P Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 38.330

10.  A genome-wide association scan of tag SNPs identifies a susceptibility variant for colorectal cancer at 8q24.21.

Authors:  Ian Tomlinson; Emily Webb; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Peter Broderick; Zoe Kemp; Sarah Spain; Steven Penegar; Ian Chandler; Maggie Gorman; Wendy Wood; Ella Barclay; Steven Lubbe; Lynn Martin; Gabrielle Sellick; Emma Jaeger; Richard Hubner; Ruth Wild; Andrew Rowan; Sarah Fielding; Kimberley Howarth; Andrew Silver; Wendy Atkin; Kenneth Muir; Richard Logan; David Kerr; Elaine Johnstone; Oliver Sieber; Richard Gray; Huw Thomas; Julian Peto; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; Richard Houlston
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2007-07-08       Impact factor: 38.330

View more
  15 in total

1.  Identification of a shared protective genetic susceptibility locus for colorectal cancer and gastric cancer.

Authors:  Na He; Lijun Liu; Xianglong Duan; Li Wang; Dongya Yuan; Tianbo Jin; Longli Kang
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-09-17

2.  Evaluation of genetic variants in association with colorectal cancer risk and survival in Asians.

Authors:  Nan Wang; Yingchang Lu; Nikhil K Khankari; Jirong Long; Hong-Lan Li; Jing Gao; Yu-Tang Gao; Yong-Bing Xiang; Xiao-Ou Shu; Wei Zheng
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Combined analysis of pri-miR-34b/c rs4938723 and TP53 Arg72Pro with cervical cancer risk.

Authors:  Fang Yuan; Ruifen Sun; Peng Chen; Yundan Liang; Shanshan Ni; Yi Quan; Juan Huang; Lin Zhang; Linbo Gao
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-11-30

4.  Genome-wide association studies and epigenome-wide association studies go together in cancer control.

Authors:  Mukesh Verma
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 3.404

Review 5.  Pediatric Germ Cell Tumors: A Developmental Perspective.

Authors:  Joshua L Pierce; A Lindsay Frazier; James F Amatruda
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2018-02-04

6.  Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Genes MACC1, RAD18, MMP7 and SDF-1a As Prognostic Factors in Resectable Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Matej Horvat; Uros Potocnik; Katja Repnik; Rajko Kavalar; Vesna Zadnik; Stojan Potrc; Borut Stabuc
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.991

Review 7.  2017 update on the relationship between diabetes and colorectal cancer: epidemiology, potential molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications.

Authors:  Nieves González; Isabel Prieto; Laura Del Puerto-Nevado; Sergio Portal-Nuñez; Juan Antonio Ardura; Marta Corton; Beatriz Fernández-Fernández; Oscar Aguilera; Carmen Gomez-Guerrero; Sebastián Mas; Juan Antonio Moreno; Marta Ruiz-Ortega; Ana Belen Sanz; Maria Dolores Sanchez-Niño; Federico Rojo; Fernando Vivanco; Pedro Esbrit; Carmen Ayuso; Gloria Alvarez-Llamas; Jesús Egido; Jesús García-Foncillas; Alberto Ortiz
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-03-14

8.  Colorectal Cancer-Associated Genes Are Associated with Tooth Agenesis and May Have a Role in Tooth Development.

Authors:  Meredith A Williams; Claudia Biguetti; Miguel Romero-Bustillos; Kanwal Maheshwari; Nuriye Dinckan; Franco Cavalla; Xiaoming Liu; Renato Silva; Sercan Akyalcin; Z Oya Uyguner; Alexandre R Vieira; Brad A Amendt; Walid D Fakhouri; Ariadne Letra
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 9.  Critical Analysis of Genome-Wide Association Studies: Triple Negative Breast Cancer Quae Exempli Causa.

Authors:  Maria-Ancuta Jurj; Mihail Buse; Alina-Andreea Zimta; Angelo Paradiso; Schuyler S Korban; Laura-Ancuta Pop; Ioana Berindan-Neagoe
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  Subtype-specific associations between breast cancer risk polymorphisms and the survival of early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Fangmeng Fu; Wenhui Guo; Yuxiang Lin; Bangwei Zeng; Wei Qiu; Meng Huang; Chuan Wang
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 5.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.