Literature DB >> 26915412

The association between telomere length and cancer risk in population studies.

Xun Zhu1, Wei Han2, Wenjie Xue1, Yuxia Zou1, Cuiwei Xie1, Jiangbo Du1, Guangfu Jin1.   

Abstract

Telomeres are crucial in the maintenance of chromosome integrity and genomic stability. A series of epidemiological studies have examined the association between telomere length and the risk of cancers, but the findings remain conflicting. We performed literature review and meta-analysis to demonstrate the relationship between telomere length and cancer risk. A total of 23,379 cases and 68,792 controls from 51 publications with 62 population studies were included in this meta-analysis to assess the association between overall cancer or cancer-specific risk and telomere length. General association and dose-response relationship were evaluated based on two and three groups, respectively. The estimates of association were evaluated with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals by the random-effects or fixed-effects model based on heterogeneity test. We observed a non-significant association between short telomeres and overall risk of cancer. Convincing evidence was observed for the association of short telomeres with an increased risk of gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer. Significant dose-response associations were also observed for gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer. Our findings indicate that telomeres may play diverse roles in different cancers, and short telomeres may be risk factors for the tumors of digestive system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26915412      PMCID: PMC4768100          DOI: 10.1038/srep22243

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Telomeres consist of several thousand DNA repeats of TTAGGG in association with a protein complex at the ends of chromosomes in eukaryotic cells. Telomeres maintain chromosome integrity and genomic stability through prohibiting nucleolytic degradation, chromosomal end-to-end fusion and irregular recombination12. In humans, the average telomere length ranges from 10 to 15 kb3, and telomeric DNA shortens during each cell replication at a rate of 50–200 bp4. In general, a critically short telomere length can trigger cell to enter replicative senescence with a result of cell death56; alternatively, cells continue to divide if death does not occur, which results in genomic instability and chromosomal abnormality. Therefore, telomere length acts as a mitotic clock for eukaryotic cells, and potentially represents the number of cell replications undertaken by each cell during its lifespan7. Telomeres are strongly correlated between tissues, and the rates of telomere shortening are also similar8. Telomere length in leukocytes is considered as useful surrogate for the other tissues. Numerous epidemiological studies have focused on analyzing the telomere length in peripheral blood cells in relation to various diseases, including multiple cancers. However, the reported findings are conflicting. In 2011, two meta-analysis910 pooling more than 20 studies reported that the short telomeres were associated with increased cancer risk. They also found particularly strong evidence for bladder, esophageal, gastric, and renal cancers, but the study numbers were limited for each cancer type. Afterwards, emerging studies with relatively large sample size investigated the association between telomere length and cancer risk. However, the findings are still conflicting other than conclusive, particularly for different cancer types. Nevertheless, more and larger studies may allow for stronger statistical power for meta-analysis, especially for single cancer type. Herein, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis on 56 relevant literatures1112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566 to estimate the overall cancer risk or cancer-specific risk associated with telomere length and to evaluate potential between-study heterogeneity of these studies.

Materials and Methods

Search strategy and selection criteria

We conducted a literature review using PubMed to identify reports on an association between telomere length and cancer risk through to May 31, 2015. The search terms were “telomere length”, “cancer” or “carcinoma”, and “risk”. We limited the publication language to English. The criteria included: 1) a case–control or cohort study design assessing the relationship between telomere length and cancer risk; 2) sufficient information for estimating odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs); 3) without overlap between studies in terms of study subjects.

Data extraction

The following data was extracted from each publication: the first author, year of publication, country, ethnicity, cancer type, the number of cases and controls grouped by median, tertiles, quartiles or quintiles of relative telomere length (T/S ratio), study design, DNA source, and method for telomere length measurement. Data was extracted separately for studies including subjects from different ethnicities, multiple cancer types or independent populations if possible. Because controls were shared for multiple cancers in two publications1147, each publication was divided into multiple studies in the cancer-specific analysis but treated as one study by pooling all cancer cases together as compared with shared controls. When multiple publications had the same or overlapping subjects, only the largest or latest studies were included.

Quantitative data synthesis

To simplify the analysis, we firstly collected the number of cases and controls from two groups (short and long) divided by the median telomere length for each study to evaluate the association. Because some studies reported data in three or five groups based on tertile or quintile value, we treated the groups of “Q1 and Q2” or “Q1, Q2 and Q3” as the short groups, respectively, and the other groups as the long groups. In the sensitivity analysis, we also performed analysis by dividing the subjects into three groups (short, medium and long). We combined Q2 and Q3 groups as the medium group for studies including four groups (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4), and combined Q1 and Q2 groups as the short group, and Q4 and Q5 groups as the long group for studies including five groups (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5). Two publications2947 providing the numbers of two groups only were excluded in this analysis. The association between the telomere length and cancer risk was examined by ORs and 95% CIs with the group of long telomeres as the reference. We performed cancer-specific analysis by cancer type and the cancer types reported in less than 3 studies were merged into the “other types of cancer” group. Gastrointestinal tumor included those diagnosed in the stomach, esophagus, colon or rectum. Cancers arising from the bladder, kidney and prostate sites were considered tumors of the urogenital system. We also performed analysis by study type (retrospective and prospective) and ethnicity (Caucasian, Asian or African American). The χ2-based Q test was performed to evaluate between-study heterogeneity and considered significant if P < 0.1067. Heterogeneity was also quantified with the I2 statistic that indicates what proportion of the total variation across studies is beyond chance. The value of 0% indicates no observed heterogeneity and larger values show increasing heterogeneity68. The fixed-effects model and the random-effects model were used to pool the data from different studies based on the Mantel-Haenszel method and the DerSimonian and Laird method, respectively69.When the P value of the heterogeneity test was ≥0.10, the fixed-effects model was used, which assumes the homogeneity of effect size across all studies. Elsewise the random-effects model was more appropriate, which tends to provide wider confidence intervals, when the results of the constituent studies differ among themselves. Potential publication bias was evaluated with funnel plots of effect sizes versus standard errors. Begg’s test was used to examine the significance of asymmetry at a significance value of 0.10. All analysis was conducted by using Review Manage (v.5.3) and R3.0.1.

Results

Characteristics of Studies

A total of 56 publications were identified with an evaluation of the association between telomere length and cancer risk (Fig. 1). Five reports were excluded because they did not provide the numbers of cases and controls grouped by the relative telomere length6263646566. The remaining 51 publications contained 62 studies (Xifeng Wu’s study16 had datasets of four different cancers; Gabriella M. Anic’s11 and Jiali Han’s13 studies had three datasets of different cancers and Geyu Liang’s14, Beatriz Sanchez-Espiridion’s43, and Yang Zhang’s47 studies had two datasets of different cancers, and Jonathan N. Hofmann21 had two datasets of independent populations. We summarized the general information of these 62 studies in Table 1. There were 10 studies for skin cancer1112131415 and tumors of urogenital system1617181920212223, 9 for gastrointestinal tumor242526272829303132, 8 for breast cancer3334353637383940 and lung cancer16414243444546, 4 for head and neck cancer164748, 3 for lymphoma495051, and 10 for the other types of cancer with each type less than 3 studies52535455565758596061 (Table S1). Most of studies (n = 51) recruited subjects from populations of Caucasian descent, 10 studies of Asian descent, and one study of African American descent. The quantitative PCR was used to measure the relative telomere length (T/S ratio) in 55 studies, whereas fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-based assays were used in 7 studies163945. Additionally, blood cells were main DNA source except one study based on circulating cell-free serum DNA54.
Figure 1

Flow chart for the process of selecting the final 51 publications.

Table 1

Information summary of 51 eligible studies included in this meta-analysis.

Author [reference]CountryYearCancer typeEthnicityNo. of case/controlStudy typeControl sourceDNA sourceMeasurement methods
Gabriella M. Anic et al._melonoma11aUSA2013melanomaCaucasian198/372retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Gabriella M. Anic et al._BCC11aUSA2013basal cell carcinomaCaucasian185/372retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Gabriella M. Anic et al._SCC11aUSA2013squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian136/372retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Hongmei Nan et al.12USA2011cutaneous melanomaCaucasian557/579retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jiali Han et al._melonoma13USA2009melanomaCaucasian204/222prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jiali Han et al._SCC13USA2009squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian254/273prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jiali Han et al._BCC13USA2009basal cell carcinomaCaucasian282/306prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Geyu Liang et al._SCC14USA2011squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian241/241retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Geyu Liang et al._BCC14USA2011basal cell carcinomaCaucasian623/1943retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Laura S. Burke et al.15USA2013melanomaCaucasian119/208retrospectivefamily-basedwhole blood or EBV-transformed lymphocytesquantitative PCR
Xifeng Wu et al._RCC16USA2003renal cell carcinomaCaucasian32/32retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocyteQ-FISH
Xifeng Wu et al._BLC16USA2003bladder cancerCaucasian135/135retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocyteQ-FISH
Lisa Mirabello et al.17USA2009prostate cancerCaucasian612/1049retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
B Julin et al.18USA2015prostate cancerCaucasian922/935retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Lauren M. Hurwitz et al.19USA2014prostate cancerCaucasian112/63retrospectivefamily-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jonathan N. Hofmann et al.20USA2013renal cell carcinomaCaucasian209/410prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jonathan N. Hofmann et al._Caucasian21USA2011renal cell carcinomaCaucasian658/550retrospectivepopulation-basedwhole bloodquantitative PCR
Jonathan N. Hofmann et al._African American21USA2011renal cell carcinomaAfrican American233/344retrospectivepopulation-basedwhole bloodquantitative PCR
Monica McGrath et al.22USA2007bladder cancerCaucasian184/192retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Karin Broberg et al.23Sweden2005bladder cancerCaucasian63/93retrospectivepopulation-basedbuccal cellquantitative PCR
Andrew J. Pellatt et al.24USA2012colon rectal cancerCaucasian525/746retrospectivepopulation-basedwhole bloodquantitative PCR
Yong Cui et al.25China2012colorectal cancerAsian512/549retrospectivePopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Qin Qin et al.26China2014colorectal cancerAsian628/1256retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Lifang Hou et al.27USA2009gastric cancerCaucasian300/416retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Rosa Ana Risques et al.28USA2007esophageal adenocarcinomaCaucasian38/300prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Qianqian Yu et al.29China2014esophageal squamous cell carcinomaAsian308/309retrospectivehospital-basedlymphocytequantitative PCR
Jiangbo Du et al.30China2015gastric cancerAsian1136/1102retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Xiaonan Liu et al.31China2009gastric cancerAsian396/376retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jinliang Xing et al.32USA2009esophageal cancerCaucasian94/92retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Maria M. Gramatges et al.33USA2010breast cancerCaucasian102/50retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Andrew J. Pellatt et al.34USA2013breast cancerCaucasian728/720retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jing Shen et al.35USA2009breast cancerCaucasian1026/1070retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Immaculata De Vivo et al.36USA2009breast cancerCaucasian896/917prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Sangmi Kim et al.37USA2011breast cancerCaucasian342/735prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Jing Shen et al.38USA2007breast cancerCaucasian283/347retrospectivefamily-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Yun-Ling Zheng et al.39USA2010breast cancerCaucasian292/335retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocyteQ-FISH
Shimian Qu et al.40USA2012breast cancerAsian601/695prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Xifeng Wu et al._LC16USA2003lung cancerCaucasian54/54retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocyteQ-FISH
Min Shen et al.41USA2011lung cancerCaucasian230/229prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Qing Lan et al.42USA2013lung cancerAsian215/215prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Beatriz Sanchez-Espiridion et al._LAC43USA2014lung adenocarcinomaCaucasian706/706retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Beatriz Sanchez-Espiridion et al._LSCC43USA2014lung squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian320/320retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Wei Jie Seow et al.44USA2014lung cancerCaucasian847/847prospectivePopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Bing Sun et al.45USA2015lung cancerCaucasian191/207retrospectivePopulation-based hospital-basedlymphocyteQ-FISH
Jin Sung Jang et al.46Korea2008lung cancerAsian243/243retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Yang Zhang et al._OCC47aUSA2013oral cavity cancerCaucasian137/335retrospectivehospital-basedlymphocytequantitative PCR
Yang Zhang et al._OPC47aUSA2013oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian188/335retrospectivehospital-basedlymphocytequantitative PCR
Da-Tian Bau et al.48USA2013oral squamous cell carcinomaCaucasian92/394retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Xifeng Wu et al._HNC16USA2003head and neck cancerCaucasian92/92retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocyteQ-FISH
Qing Lan et al.49USA2009non-Hodgkin lymphomaCaucasian107/107retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Fatemeh Saberi Hosnijeh et al.50Iran2014B-cell lymphomaCaucasian414/414retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Thomas A. Widmann et al.51Germany2007non-Hodgkin’s lymphomaCaucasian40/40retrospectivehospital-basedlymphocyteFlow-FISH
Juan Liu et al.52China2011hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinomaAsian240/240retrospectivehospital-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Shannon M. Lynch et al.53USA2013pancreatic cancerCaucasian193/660prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Xiaoying Fu et al.54USA2012hepatocellular carcinomaAsian140/280retrospectivehospital-basedcirculating cell-free serum DNAquantitative PCR
Daniele Campa et al.55Germany2014myelomaCaucasian140/468retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Kathryn L. Terry et al.56USA2012ovarian cancerCaucasian911/947retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Farzana Walcott et al.57USA2013gliomaCaucasian101/198prospectivepopulation-basedblood, buffy coat, or buccal cellsquantitative PCR
Jennifer Prescott et al.58USA2010endometrial cancerCaucasian279/791prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Maren Weischer et al.59Denmark2013mixedCaucasian3142/41169prospectivePopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Lisa Mirabello et al.60USA2009ovarian cancerCaucasian99/100retrospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR
Peter Willeit et al.61Italy2010mixedCaucasian92/695prospectivepopulation-basedleukocytequantitative PCR

aThe controls were shared for different cancer types in the same publication.

Quantitative Synthesis

We obtained the telomere length data from 51 publications consisting of 23,379 cases and 68,792 controls. When pooling all eligible studies into the meta-analysis, we found a non-significant association between short telomeres and an increased risk of overall cancer risk (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.98–1.23, Table 2). The directions of association were consistent among three populations from different descents (ORs = 1.08, 1.15 and 1.22 for Caucasian, Asian and African American, respectively, Table 2). The results of analysis for subgroups of different ethnicities have been shown in Table S2. However, the association was disappeared in prospective studies (OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87–1.19). Moreover, we also excluded three prospective studies285961 from the meta-analysis and found the similar results for overall cancer risk (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95–1.21).
Table 2

Summary of meta-analysis results for associations between telomere length and cancer risk.

GroupsNumbers
Heterogeneity
Associations (short vs. long)
StudyCase/ControlPI2OR(95% CI)P
Overall6223379/68792<0.0010.901.10(0.98–1.23)0.09
Populations
 Caucasian5118727/63183<0.0010.861.08(0.97–1.21)0.18
 Asian104419/5265<0.0010.951.15(0.78–1.68)0.49
 African American1233/3441.22(0.88–1.71)0.23
Study design
 Prospective167925/48662<0.0010.821.02(0.87–1.19)0.80
 Retrospective4615454/20130<0.0010.911.14(0.98–1.33)0.10
Skin cancer
 Prospective3740/8010.2840.210.92(0.76–1.13)0.44
 Retrospective72059/4087<0.0010.941.36(0.82–2.24)0.23
 Total102799/4888<0.0010.911.17(0.83–1.66)0.37
Tumors of urogenital system
 Prospective1209/4100.92(0.66–1.28)0.61
 Retrospective92951/3393<0.0010.701.01(0.81–1.25)0.95
 Total103160/38030.0020.660.99(0.82–1.20)0.95
Gastrointestinal tumor
 Prospective138/3001.92(0.95–3.90)0.07
 Retrospective83899/4846<0.0010.801.60(1.30–1.97)8.20E-06
 Total93937/5146<0.0010.781.62(1.33–1.97)2.03E-06
Breast cancer
 Prospective31839/23470.37001.13(0.99–1.28)0.06
 Retrospective52431/2522<0.0010.870.82(0.58–1.17)0.28
 Total84270/4869<0.0010.820.96(0.78– 1.19)0.70
Lung cancer
 Prospective31292/12910.3300.100.78(0.67–0.91)1.69E-03
 Retrospective51514/1530<0.0010.941.01(0.53–1.93)0.97
 Total82806/2821<0.0010.900.91(0.63–1.31)0.60
Head and neck cancer
 Prospective     
 Retrospective4509/11560.0190.701.86(1.23–2.82)3.50E-03
 Total4509/11560.0190.701.86(1.23–2.82)3.50E-03
Lymphoma
 Prospective     
 Retrospective3561/561<0.0010.901.31(0.44–3.84)0.63
 Total3561/561<0.0010.901.31(0.44–3.84)0.63
Other types of cancer
 Prospective53807/43513<0.0010.871.22(0.85–1.75)0.29
 Retrospective51530/2035<0.0010.950.69(0.33–1.45)0.32
 Total105337/45548<0.0010.940.92(0.64–1.32)0.65
Considering that heterogeneity is extensively occurred across cancer types, we then performed cancer-specific analysis (Fig. 2). Short telomeres were significantly associated with increased risks of gastrointestinal tumor (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.33–1.97) and head and neck cancer (OR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.23–2.82). Of interest, in prospective studies rather than retrospective studies, short telomeres were associated with a decreased risk of lung cancer (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67–0.91). There was no obvious evidence supporting the association for the other cancer types (Table 2).
Figure 2

ORs and 95% CIs for cancer risk associated with telomere length (short vs. long).

To evaluate the robustness of pooling results based on dichotomized telomere length, we further divided the cases and controls into three respective groups for each study, and tested the dose-response relationship between telomere length and cancer risk by pooling the studies together. We observed a significant increased risk of overall cancer for short telomeres with a trend OR (95% CI) of 1.09 (1.01–1.19) (Table 3). In cancer-specific analysis, dose-response effects of telomere length were also detected on gastrointestinal tumor (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.08–1.54), and head and neck cancer (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.74–3.02), which were consistent with the above results based on dichotomized telomere length (Table 3).
Table 3

Dose-response relationship between telomere length and cancer risk by cancer type.

Cancer typeNumbers
Heterogeneity
Associations (short vs. medium vs. long)
StudyCase/ControlPI2OR(95% CI)P
Overall5922674/67727<0.0010.911.09(1.01–1.19)0.037
Skin cancer102799/4888<0.0010.941.11(0.83–1.49)0.496
Tumors of urogenital system103160/3803<0.0010.791.15(0.97–1.37)0.113
Gastrointestinal tumor83558/4749<0.0010.881.29(1.08–1.54)4.24E-03
Breast cancer84270/4869<0.0010.830.96(0.83–1.11)0.603
Lung cancer82805/2823<0.0010.901.11(0.86–1.42)0.415
Head and neck cancer2184/4860.2840.132.30(1.74–3.02)2.85E-09
Lymphoma3561/561<0.0010.870.99(0.53–1.83)0.970

Heterogeneity analyses

Substantial heterogeneity was observed among all studies for the association between telomere length and cancer risk (P < 0.001, I 2 = 90%, Fig. 2). We then evaluated the potential source of heterogeneity and found significant effect difference between subgroups for cancer type (P < 0.001), study design (P = 0.008), and ethnicity (P < 0.001).

Publication bias

The shape of the funnel plot seemed symmetrical (Fig. 3), and the Begg’s test did not show a significant publication bias in the current meta-analysis (P = 0.142). These indicated that bias from publications might not have a significant influence on the results of our meta-analysis on the association between telomere length and cancer risk.
Figure 3

Funnel plot analysis to detect publication bias.

Discussion

In this study, we performed the largest and most comprehensive literature review and meta-analysis on the association of telomere length and cancer risk, including a total of 23,379 cancer cases and 68,792 controls from 51 independent publications. We did not find significant association between telomere length and overall risk of cancers, but showed a robust association with gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer. In addition, we also observed promising association of short telomeres with a decreased lung cancer risk in the prospective studies. Furthermore, dose-response relationships provided further evidence for the associations with gastrointestinal tumor, and head and neck cancer. Telomeres are specialized structures that protect chromosome ends and participate in a number of processes of a great cellular relevance70, which makes the telomere crucial in cellular senescence and carcinogenesis71. Progressive telomere shortening occurs with each cell division up to a point termed “replicative senescence” in most human somatic cells72. Basic biology studies have established that telomere shortening is a fundamental feature of dividing cells and directly related to the age of the cell lineage, and that telomere crisis in the present of defective cell-cycle control can lead to chromosomal instability and a malignant phenotype73. The dysfunctional telomeres will result in chromosomal fusions, continuous “breakage-fusion-bridge” cycles, derived chromosome imbalances, gene amplifications, and ultimately the generation of complex non-reciprocal translocations, a hallmark feature of adult solid tumors and genomic instability in general74. At the population level, the high incidence of cancer has prompted that shortening of telomeres promotes tumor development and several studies have found that patients with shorter telomeres in peripheral blood cells have a higher risk of developing carcinomas75. In this meta-analysis, although we found there is no significant association between telomere length and overall risk of cancers, but we demonstrated a significant association with gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer, supporting the hypothesis that excessive telomere shortening may play an important role in accelerating tumor onset and progression. Gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer is kind of epithelial malignancies in digestive system. The majority of epithelial malignancies appear to develop from morphologically defined precursor lesions termed intraepithelial neoplasia76. Telomere length in more than 90% intraepithelial neoplasia is dramatically shortened77. In addition, telomeres of gastrointestinal tumor may exhibit an intensified rate of shortening that is greatly accelerated as compared to the normal tissue of origin78. However, our results revealed heterogeneous association results between different cancer types. Short telomeres were convincingly associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer, which, however, was not observed in other types of cancer. Of note, a significant but inverse association was shown for lung cancer in prospective studies. These inconsistent results across cancer types may reflect different carcinogenic mechanisms conferred by specific telomeres in specific cancer types. For example, several studies1112 found a higher risk for melanoma among individuals with longer telomeres, this may suggest that shorter telomere lengths protect against the malignant transformation of cells within melanocytic nevi by limiting proliferative capacity and triggering the entry to senescence stage. To the contrary, longer telomeres were found to be protective for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) with the reason of that UV exposure may be more likely to induce genomic abnormalities in cells with shorter telomeres. In addition, Sanchez-Espiridion et al.43 found that patients with lung adenocarcinoma had longer telomeres than controls, whereas patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma had shorter telomeres compared with controls. These findings suggest that telomere length may affect cancer risk in a histologic manner, further highlighting the distinct roles of telomere in cancer development. In addition to the cancer-specific associations, telomere length may also involve in cancer risk in a complex manner rather than a simple linear relationship. Cui et al.25 reported a U-shaped association between telomere length in peripheral blood cells and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, and they found that both very short and very long telomeres are risk factors for colorectal cancer. Recently, we also reported a non-linear relationship between telomeres and gastric cancer risk28. Similar results were also reported in pancreatic cancer64, breast cancer40 and glioma66. These observations are also biologically plausible because telomeres may act as a double-edged sword in the development of cancer. Telomere shortening can generally lead to chromosomal instability and finally initiate the process of carcinogenesis16. However, long telomeres may allow for more cell divisions and increase the chance of acquiring abnormalities for cancer development79. However, due to lack of original data, we cannot evaluate this phenomenon in this study. Further studies are warranted to carefully test these findings. There are some limitations in this meta-analysis. Firstly, some factors can affect the length of telomeres, such as age, gender, and tobacco smoking, and oxidative stress8081. The results of this meta-analysis were based on unadjusted estimates, because odds ratios (ORs) derived from different studies were not adjusted by the same potential confounders or only the number of cases and controls was provided without the detailed information of other variables. Secondly, we performed analysis by dividing the subjects into two or three groups simply due to lack of original data of relative telomere length, which may decrease the power to evaluate the relationship of telomere length and overall risk of cancers. In the main analysis of this study, we treated the groups of “Q1 and Q2” (for three groups) or “Q1, Q2 and Q3” (for five groups) as the short groups, and the other groups as the long groups. To address the stability of the results, we also treated the groups of “Q1” (for studies with three groups) or “Q1, and Q2” (for studies with five groups) as the short groups and the other groups as the long groups, and found that the results were similar (OR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.96–1.22 for overall cancer risk). In summary, our meta-analysis provided strong evidence for the association between short telomeres and increased risk of gastrointestinal tumor and head and neck cancer. In addition, the short telomeres also increased, although not significantly, the risk of overall cancer in the analysis of dichotomized variable, this association may be influenced by the study numbers of different tumors because the effects are different between tumors. However, larger, well-designed prospective studies are needed to validate these findings, which may help to uncover the potential mechanisms of telomere dysfunction in cancer development.

Additional Information

How to cite this article: Zhu, X. et al. The association between telomere length and cancer risk in population studies. Sci. Rep. 6, 22243; doi: 10.1038/srep22243 (2016).
  79 in total

1.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Constitutional short telomeres are strong genetic susceptibility markers for bladder cancer.

Authors:  Karin Broberg; Jonas Björk; Karin Paulsson; Mattias Höglund; Maria Albin
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 4.944

Review 3.  Alternative lengthening of telomeres: models, mechanisms and implications.

Authors:  Anthony J Cesare; Roger R Reddel
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 53.242

4.  Genetic and lifestyle influence on telomere length and subsequent risk of colon cancer in a case control study.

Authors:  Andrew J Pellatt; Roger K Wolff; Abbie Lundgreen; Richard Cawthon; Martha L Slattery
Journal:  Int J Mol Epidemiol Genet       Date:  2012-08-31

5.  Telomere length and genetic analyses in population-based studies of endometrial cancer risk.

Authors:  Jennifer Prescott; Monica McGrath; I-Min Lee; Julie E Buring; Immaculata De Vivo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Telomere length in peripheral blood lymphocytes contributes to the development of HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Erich M Sturgis; Kristina R Dahlstrom; Juyi Wen; Hongliang Liu; Qingyi Wei; Guojun Li; Zhensheng Liu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 7.  The human telomere and its relationship to human disease, therapy, and tissue engineering.

Authors:  Ian K Moon; Michael B Jarstfer
Journal:  Front Biosci       Date:  2007-05-01

8.  Telomere length in peripheral leukocyte DNA and gastric cancer risk.

Authors:  Lifang Hou; Sharon A Savage; Martin J Blaser; Guillermo Perez-Perez; Mirjam Hoxha; Laura Dioni; Valeria Pegoraro; Linda M Dong; Witold Zatonski; Jolanta Lissowska; Wong-Ho Chow; Andrea Baccarelli
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Telomere dysfunction: a potential cancer predisposition factor.

Authors:  Xifeng Wu; Christopher I Amos; Yong Zhu; Hua Zhao; Barton H Grossman; Jerry W Shay; Sherry Luo; Waun Ki Hong; Margaret R Spitz
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-08-20       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Leukocyte telomere length predicts cancer risk in Barrett's esophagus.

Authors:  Rosa Ana Risques; Thomas L Vaughan; Xiaohong Li; Robert D Odze; Patricia L Blount; Kamran Ayub; Jasmine L Gallaher; Brian J Reid; Peter S Rabinovitch
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  53 in total

Review 1.  Urban environment and cancer in wildlife: available evidence and future research avenues.

Authors:  Tuul Sepp; Beata Ujvari; Paul W Ewald; Frédéric Thomas; Mathieu Giraudeau
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Higher maternal vitamin D concentrations are associated with longer leukocyte telomeres in newborns.

Authors:  Jung-Ha Kim; Gwang Jun Kim; Donghee Lee; Jae-Hong Ko; Inja Lim; Hyoweon Bang; Bart W Koes; Byeongchan Seong; Duk-Chul Lee
Journal:  Matern Child Nutr       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Recent advances of Blood telomere length (BTL) shortening: A potential biomarker for development of cancer.

Authors:  Paramita Mandal
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 3.201

4.  Association between shortened telomere length and rheumatoid arthritis : A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Y H Lee; S-C Bae
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.372

5.  Moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea is associated with telomere lengthening.

Authors:  Katarzyna Polonis; Virend K Somers; Christiane Becari; Naima Covassin; Phillip J Schulte; Brooke R Druliner; Ruth A Johnson; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Lisa A Boardman; Prachi Singh
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 4.733

Review 6.  Leukocyte Telomere Length and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: Updated Epidemiologic Review.

Authors:  Samuel O Antwi; Gloria M Petersen
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.327

7.  The paternal age at conception effect on offspring telomere length: mechanistic, comparative and adaptive perspectives.

Authors:  Dan T A Eisenberg; Christopher W Kuzawa
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Telomere Length and Sleep in the Women's Health Initiative.

Authors:  Laurie Grieshober; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Rachael Hageman Blair; Lina Mu; Jingmin Liu; Jing Nie; Cara L Carty; Lauren Hale; Candyce H Kroenke; Andrea Z LaCroix; Alex P Reiner; Heather M Ochs-Balcom
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Mendelian Randomization and mediation analysis of leukocyte telomere length and risk of lung and head and neck cancers.

Authors:  Linda Kachuri; Olli Saarela; Stig Egil Bojesen; George Davey Smith; Geoffrey Liu; Maria Teresa Landi; Neil E Caporaso; David C Christiani; Mattias Johansson; Salvatore Panico; Kim Overvad; Antonia Trichopoulou; Paolo Vineis; Ghislaine Scelo; David Zaridze; Xifeng Wu; Demetrius Albanes; Brenda Diergaarde; Pagona Lagiou; Gary J Macfarlane; Melinda C Aldrich; Adonina Tardón; Gad Rennert; Andrew F Olshan; Mark C Weissler; Chu Chen; Gary E Goodman; Jennifer A Doherty; Andrew R Ness; Heike Bickeböller; H-Erich Wichmann; Angela Risch; John K Field; M Dawn Teare; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Erik H F M van der Heijden; June C Carroll; Aage Haugen; Shanbeh Zienolddiny; Vidar Skaug; Victor Wünsch-Filho; Eloiza H Tajara; Raquel Ayoub Moysés; Fabio Daumas Nunes; Stephen Lam; Jose Eluf-Neto; Martin Lacko; Wilbert H M Peters; Loïc Le Marchand; Eric J Duell; Angeline S Andrew; Silvia Franceschi; Matthew B Schabath; Jonas Manjer; Susanne Arnold; Philip Lazarus; Anush Mukeriya; Beata Swiatkowska; Vladimir Janout; Ivana Holcatova; Jelena Stojsic; Dana Mates; Jolanta Lissowska; Stefania Boccia; Corina Lesseur; Xuchen Zong; James D McKay; Paul Brennan; Christopher I Amos; Rayjean J Hung
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Biological aging in childhood and adolescence following experiences of threat and deprivation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natalie L Colich; Maya L Rosen; Eileen S Williams; Katie A McLaughlin
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 17.737

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.