| Literature DB >> 26504743 |
Aditi Bhowmik1, Sayantan Nath1, Sambuddha Das1, Sankar Kumar Ghosh1, Yashmin Choudhury1.
Abstract
A number of different epidemiological studies have measured the association between the risk of different cancers and polymorphism at promoter region of 5' untranslated region (5'-UTR) of the Ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) gene. However the results were contentious rather than conclusive. The current study was aimed at evaluating the association between the SNP (rs189037 G>A) and the risk of head and neck cancer and lung cancer by conducting a meta-analysis. A total of 9 case-control studies were considered for this quantitative analysis. Stats Direct Statistical software (version 2.7.2) was used to evaluate the crude odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence interval (CI). The dominant model (GG vs. GA + AA) showed no heterogeneity and the fixed effects pooled OR was found to be significant (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.05-1.25) at p = 0.003. The pooled OR for fixed effects of heterozygote and homozygote mutant allele (GA vs. AA) model was significant (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.30, p = 0.006) and no heterogeneity was observed for this model. The current meta-analysis manifested that ATM rs189037 G>A genetic polymorphism may contribute increased risk of head and neck and lung cancer. Moreover, the AA mutant allele was found to be related significantly with the prognosis of lung cancer and head and neck cancer.Entities:
Keywords: ATM (rs189037 G>A); Head and neck cancer; Lung cancer; Meta-analysis
Year: 2015 PMID: 26504743 PMCID: PMC4564396 DOI: 10.1016/j.mgene.2015.08.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Meta Gene ISSN: 2214-5400
Fig. 1Flow chart of literature search and relevant study selection. Total 9 case–control studies were included in this meta-analysis.
Fig. 2CASP scores for 9 eligible studies for the relationship between ATM rs189037 polymorphism and susceptibility to lung, head and neck cancer.
Characteristics of relevant studies included in meta-analysis and genotypic frequencies of rs189037 G > A.
| Study | Ethnicity | Type of cancer | Source of control | Genotyping method | Rs189037 G > A (case/control) | pa value | Case | Control | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | GA | AA | GG | GA | AA | |||||||
| Asians | Lung | HB | TaqMan real-time PCR | 852/852 | 0.29 | 217 | 435 | 200 | 264 | 434 | 154 | |
| Asians | Papillary thyroid carcinoma | HB | MALDI-TOF-MS | 355/360 | 0.26 | 90 | 196 | 69 | 102 | 189 | 69 | |
| Asians | Lung | HB | TaqMan real-time PCR | 487/516 | 0.12 | 148 | 240 | 99 | 152 | 272 | 92 | |
| Asians | Oral | HB | PCR-RFLP | 620/620 | 0.47 | 181 | 277 | 162 | 239 | 285 | 96 | |
| Caucasians | Papillary thyroid carcinoma | PB | Illumina GoldenGate Genotyping Assay | 68/201 | 0.31 | 13 | 32 | 23 | 35 | 106 | 60 | |
| Asians | Papillary thyroid carcinoma | HB | TaqMan assay | 428/182 | 0.34 | 134 | 211 | 83 | 56 | 84 | 42 | |
| Asians | Lung | HB | MassARRAY assay | 728/717 | 0.72 | 238 | 345 | 145 | 239 | 354 | 124 | |
| Asians | Lung | HB | SNP-IT assays | 611/614 | 0.71 | 190 | 316 | 105 | 195 | 306 | 113 | |
| Asians | Lung | HB | PCR-RFLP | 358/716 | 0.61 | 118 | 176 | 64 | 255 | 339 | 122 | |
pa value > 0.05 indicates control group is in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium equation.
Main result of pooled ORs of ATM rs189037 G > A polymorphism.
| Genotype rs189037 G > A | OR | 95% CI | pb value | p value for Cochran Q test | I2 | Combination method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG vs. AA | 1.23 | 1.00–1.51 | 0.053 | 0.01 | 63.6% | Random effect |
| GG vs. (GA + AA) | 1.14 | 1.05–1.25 | 0.003 | 0.17 | 31.6% | Fixed effect |
| (GG + GA) vs. AA | 1.17 | 1.00–1.40 | 0.068 | 0.01 | 60.7% | Random effect |
| G vs. A | 1.11 | 1.00–1.23 | 0.046 | 0.01 | 63.7% | Random effect |
| GG vs. GA | 1.09 | 1.00–1.20 | 0.066 | 0.66 | 0% | Fixed effect |
| GA vs. AA | 1.17 | 1.04–1.30 | 0.006 | 0.63 | 45.8% | Fixed effect |
b — p heterogeneity.
Fig. 3Figure showing forest plots of ATM rs189037 (G > A) polymorphism in association with head and neck and lung cancer: a) GG vs. AA b) GG vs. GA + AA, c) GG + GA vs. AA d) G vs. A e) GG vs. GA f) GA vs. AA.
Fig. 4Funnel plot results of different models used in meta-analysis: a) GG vs. AA b) GG vs. GA + AA, c) GG + GA vs. AA d) G vs. A e) GG vs. GA f) GA vs. AA.