Literature DB >> 28212577

IRS-2 rs1805097 polymorphism is associated with the decreased risk of colorectal cancer.

Jiefeng Yin1, Zhe Zhang1, Huajun Zheng2, Lei Xu2.   

Abstract

Recent studies explored the association between insulin receptor substrate-2 (IRS-2) gene rs1805097 polymorphism and colorectal cancer (CRC) with contradictory findings. Therefore, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis by searching the databases of PubMed and Embase. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using fixed-effect or random-effect models. A total of 5 citations containing 6 case-control studies involving 4,333 cases and 5,333 controls were included. Our data indicated that IRS-2 rs1805097 polymorphism was associated with decreased risk of CRC. Stratification analysis of ethnicity found that rs1805097 polymorphism decreased the risk of CRC among Americans. Stratification analysis of cancer type suggested that this polymorphism decreased the risk of colon cancer. In summary, this meta-analysis indicates that IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism plays an important role in the pathogenesis of CRC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IRS-2; colorectal cancer; meta-analysis; rs1805097; single nucleotide polymorphism

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28212577      PMCID: PMC5421913          DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.15342

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncotarget        ISSN: 1949-2553


INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide [1]. CRC is one of the primary causes of cancer-related mortality. To date, the etiology of CRC is still unclear. Some environmental factors including diet, cigarette smoking, physical inactivity, and alcohol consumption, are considered to influence the risk of CRC [2]. Studies demonstrated that those environmental factors through the insulin pathway are significantly associated with the risk of CRC [3, 4]. Several researches provided evidence to support that insulin is associated with the risk of CRC [3, 4]. Some researchers reported that hyperinsulinaemia and type 2 diabetes influence the risk of colon cancer [5]. Animal research found that insulin enhances the growth of aberrant crypt foci, CRC precursor lesions, and increases the number and the size of the tumors [4]. Insulin receptor substrates (IRSs) are involved in insulin signaling pathway [6]. IRS-2 plays an important role in glucose metabolism, tumor progression, and metastasis [7]. A host of studies [8-12] investigated the association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk, but with conflicting findings. These conflicting and inconclusive results may due to clinical heterogeneity, diverse ethnic populations, different tumor types, and small sample sizes. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to clarify the possible association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk.

RESULTS

Characteristics of the included studies

We yielded a total of 51 citations after initial search. 33 citations were removed after removing duplicates and screening the titles and abstracts. 18 citations were selected for further full text review. 13 citations were excluded: 1 investigated other polymorphisms; 5 were about other diseases; 2 were meta-analyses. Finally, 5 citations [8-12] containing 6 studies (4,333 cases and 5,333 controls) were included in this meta-analysis. Selection for eligible studies included in this meta-analysis was presented in Figure 1. The characteristics of included studies are summarized in Table 1. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scores of all included studies ranged from 5 to 8 stars. All studies conformed to the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE).
Figure 1

Selection for eligible publications included in this meta-analysis

Table 1

Characteristics of included studies

Author and yearCountrySOCGenotype methodsEthnicityCaseControlHWENOS
GGGAAAGGGAAA
Mahmoundi_2014IranHBPCRCaucasian1091183413915347Y6
Yukselogu_2014TurkeyHBPCR-RFLPCaucasian795824888524Y7
Pechivanis_2007CzechHBPCRCaucasian21127781268309106Y7
Samowitz_2006USAHBPCRAmerican718657197829906229Y8
Slattery_2004aUSAPBPCRAmerican467409128481552134Y6
Slattery_2004bUSAPBPCRAmerican325343562421423139Y6

Abbreviations: SOC, source of control; PB, population-based controls; HB, hospital-based controls; HWE, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Abbreviations: SOC, source of control; PB, population-based controls; HB, hospital-based controls; HWE, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Meta-analysis of IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism

As shown in Table 2, we detected an association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (AA+GA vs. GG: OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84–0.99, P = 0.022, Figure 2). Stratification analysis by ethnicity indicated that rs1805097 polymorphism was significantly associated with a decreased risk of CRC among Americans (AA+GA vs. GG: OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80–0.97, P = 0.007, Figure 3), but not among other Caucasians. Stratification analysis of cancer type suggested that this polymorphism decreased the risk of colon cancer (AA+GA vs. GG: OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76–0.94, P = 0.002, Figure 4). Regarding stratification analysis by source of control (SOC), no positive result was obtained in both population-based population and hospital-based population (Table 3).
Table 2

Meta-analysis of association between IRS-2 rs1805097 polymorphism and colorectal cancer risk

ComparisonOR(95%CI)P-valueP for heterogeneityI2 (%)Model
A vs. G0.96(0.90,1.01)0.1320.9390Fixed
AA+GA vs. GG0.91(0.84,0.99)0.0220.26023.2Fixed
AA vs. GG+GA1.02(0.91,1.15)0.7210.6950Fixed
AA vs. GG0.97(0.86,1.10)0.6690.9940Fixed
GA vs. GG0.91(0.79,1.05)0.1890.05553.7Random
Figure 2

Forest plot shows odds ratio for the associations between rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (AA+GA vs. GG)

Figure 3

Stratification analyses by ethnicity shows odds ratio for the associations between rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (AA+GA vs. GG)

Figure 4

Stratification analyses of cancer type between rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (AA+GA vs. GG)

Table 3

Summary of the subgroup analyses in this meta-analysis

ComparisonCategoryCategoryStudiesOR (95% CI)P-valueP for heterogeneity
A vs. GEthnicityCaucasians31.00(0.88,1.13)0.9430.913
Americans30.94(0.88,1.01)0.0930.939
Cancer typemixed31.00(0.88,1.13)0.9430.913
Colon cancer20.93(0.86,1.01)0.0780.696
Rectal cancer10.98(0.85,1.13)0.772<0.001
SOCHB40.96(0.89-1.04)0.3500.892
PB20.94(0.86-1.04)0.2180.472
AA+GA vs. GGEthnicityCaucasians31.01(0.85,1.20)0.8840.519
Americans30.88(0.80,0.97)0.0070.198
Cancer typemixed31.01(0.85,1.20)0.8840.519
Colon cancer20.84(0.76,0.94)0.0020.499
Rectal cancer11.02(0.84,1.23)0.867<0.001
SOCHB40.92(0.83,1.02)0.1250.358
PB20.89(0.79,1.01)0.0820.076
AA vs.GA+ GGEthnicityCaucasians30.96(0.75,1.22)0.7320.625
Americans31.04(0.91,1.20)0.5410.422
Cancer typemixed30.96(0.75,1.22)0.7320.625
Colon cancer21.10(0.94,1.29)0.2380.825
Rectal cancer10.89(0.67,1.18)0.414<0.001
SOCHB41.03(0.88,1.20)0.7040.674
PB21.01(0.84,1.22)0.9200.225
AA vs.GGEthnicityCaucasians30.98(0.76,1.27)0.8750.900
Americans30.97(0.84,1.12)0.6870.898
Cancer typemixed30.98(0.76,1.27)0.8750.900
Colon cancer20.99(0.84,1.17)0.9040.957
Rectal cancer10.91(0.68,1.23)0.549<0.001
SOCHB40.99(0.84,1.17)0.8820.975
PB20.95(0.78,1.16)0.6620.718
GA vs.GGEthnicityCaucasians31.01(0.82,1.24)0.9290.292
Americans30.91(0.79,1.05)0.0990.062
Cancer typemixed31.01(0.82,1.24)0.9290.292
Colon cancer20.81(0.72,0.90)<0.0010.428
Rectal cancer11.05(0.86,1.29)0.635<0.001
SOCHB40.93(0.78,1.11)0.4040.145
PB20.89(0.65,1.22)0.4750.021

Abbreviations: SOC, source of control; PB, population-based controls; HB, hospital-based controls.

Abbreviations: SOC, source of control; PB, population-based controls; HB, hospital-based controls. We assessed sensitivity by omitting each study once at a time in every genetic model for rs1805097 polymorphism. Our data indicated that the findings of this meta-analysis were stable and trustworthy (AA vs. GG+GA, Figure 5). Both Egger's and Begg's tests (A vs. G, Figure 6) revealed that there was no obvious publication bias for rs1805097 polymorphism (data not shown).
Figure 5

Sensitivity analysis about rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (AA vs. GG+GA)

Figure 6

Begg's tests for rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk (A vs. G)

DISCUSSION

In this current meta-analysis, we found that IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism decreased the risk of CRC. Stratification analysis revealed that rs1805097 polymorphism was associated with a decreased risk of CRC among Americans. In addition, stratification analysis of cancer type suggested that rs1805097 polymorphism decreased the risk of colon cancer. Insulin, a hormone, controls the energy homeostasis by functioning on target tissues. Insulin increases cell proliferation and decreases apoptosis [4, 13]. Many studies indicated that hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance (IR) are involved in the etiology of CRC [14]. Hyperinsulinemia interacting with obesity was an important risk factor for CRC [4, 14]. Larsson et al. found a relationship between diabetes and increased risk of CRC [13]. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF), insulin-like growth factor binding proteins (IGFBPs), insulin and IRS play crucial roles in the initiation of cell growth and CRC proliferation [15, 16]. IRS-2 mediates the major metabolic, proliferative, and antiapoptotic functions of the IGF1 [17, 18]. IRS-2 gene variants were reported to be involved in the modulation of IRS-1 or IRS-2 functions and could be relevant to colorectal tumorigenesis [19]. So far, a number of studies [8-12] investigated the association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk. However, these studies yield contradictory results. Thus, we conducted this current meta-analysis. Previous meta-analysis by Hu et al. indicated that IRS-2 rs1805097 polymorphism was not associated with CRC risk [20]. They only included 4 studies. To date, two studies [9, 11] have been reported in recent years since the meta-analysis [20]. In analysis of all included studies, our meta-analysis found that rs1805097 polymorphism was associated with decreased CRC risk. We believed that Hu et al. falsely extracted the genotype numbers of cases and controls from an American study [8]. Actually, the genotype numbers of this study were as following: colon cancers (GG=467, GA=409, AA=128), controls (GG=481, GA=552, AA=134); rectal cancers (GG=325, GA=343, AA=98), controls (GG=421, GA=423, AA=139). In addition, the above false data explained the reason why the HWE value in this American study was wrong [8]. According to our data, the study [8] by Slattery et al. conformed to HWE. We also conducted stratification analysis of cancer type, which was not performed by Hu et al. [20]. Our data suggested that rs1805097 polymorphism was associated with a decreased risk of colon cancer. We believe our meta-analysis more robust than previous meta-analysis by Hu et al. [20]. First, we included 2 extra studies and the sample size of this meta-analysis was larger than previous meta-analysis. Second, sensitivity analysis indicated that our data about rs1805097 polymorphism were trustworthy and stable. Third, the power analysis indicated that this meta-analysis had a power of 96.9% to detect the effect of rs1805097 polymorphism on CRC risk with an OR of 0.91. Several potential limitations should be addressed in this meta-analysis. First, due to limited data, we could not investigate the association between CRC and other potential factors, such as age and sex. Second, our results were based on unadjusted estimates for confounding factors, which might have affected the final findings. Third, we could not assess potential gene-gene and gene-environment interactions because of the lack of relevant data. Fourth, the sample size of this meta-analysis is not very large, and the number of included studies is small. Fifth, the findings of the stratified analyses should be interpreted with caution because of limited sample sizes. In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicates that IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism decreased the risk of CRC. Further studies are necessary to validate whether rs1805097 polymorphism contributes to CRC susceptibility in other ethnic groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search and inclusion criteria

We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase to identify studies through August 19, 2016. The following search terms were used: “cancer,” ‘‘carcinoma,’’ “neoplasm,’’ ‘‘tumor,’’ ‘‘Insulin Receptor Substrate 2,’’ ‘‘IRS-2,’’ and ‘‘IRS 2′’. No restrictions were placed on the literature search. Reference lists were identified by hand screening. The identified studies conformed to the following criteria: (1) studies that evaluated the association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk, (2) study provided sufficient data to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), (3) case-control study.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Relevant information was carefully extracted from all eligible studies. The extracted information from all eligible studies including: name of first author, publication year, country of origin, ethnicity, genotype methods and genotype numbers of cases and controls. Two authors independently performed the extraction of data and assessed the study quality based on the NOS [21]. All disagreements were discussed and resolved with consensus.

Statistical analyses

All statistical analyses were performed using the Stata 11.0 software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). ORs and 95%CIs were used to assess the strength of association between IRS-2 gene rs1805097 polymorphism and CRC risk. Stratification analyses were carried out by ethnicity, SOC and cancer type. When a Q test indicated P < 0.1 or I2 > 50% indicated heterogeneity across studies, a random-effect model was used. Otherwise, the fixed-effects model was applied [22]. Allele model, dominant model, recessive model, homozygous model, and heterozygous model were used in this meta-analysis. We performed leave-one-out sensitivity analysis to evaluate the stability of the overall results. We assessed the departure from the HWE in the controls using Pearson's χ2 test. Potential publication bias was assessed by Begger's and Egger's linear regression test [23]; P < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistically significant. The power of this meta-analysis was calculated with a significant value of 0.05 [24].
  24 in total

1.  The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis.

Authors:  L V Hedges; T D Pigott
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2001-09

2.  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

Review 3.  Insulin, insulin-like growth factors and colon cancer: a review of the evidence.

Authors:  E Giovannucci
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.798

4.  Diabetes mellitus and risk of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Susanna C Larsson; Nicola Orsini; Alicja Wolk
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 5.  Genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Albert de la Chapelle
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 60.716

6.  Associations among IRS1, IRS2, IGF1, and IGFBP3 genetic polymorphisms and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Martha L Slattery; Wade Samowitz; Karen Curtin; Khe Ni Ma; Michael Hoffman; Bette Caan; Susan Neuhausen
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  Insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), IGF binding proteins, their biologic interactions, and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Manjinder S Sandhu; David B Dunger; Edward L Giovannucci
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-07-03       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 8.  Insulin-like growth factors and cancer.

Authors:  Gregor Fürstenberger; Hans-Jörg Senn
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 41.316

9.  Insulin receptor substrate-2 deficiency impairs brain growth and promotes tau phosphorylation.

Authors:  Markus Schubert; Derek P Brazil; Deborah J Burks; Jake A Kushner; Jing Ye; Carrie L Flint; Janet Farhang-Fallah; Pieter Dikkes; Xavier M Warot; Carlos Rio; Gabriel Corfas; Morris F White
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-08-06       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Novel insulin receptor substrate 1 and 2 variants in breast and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Diana Liberata Esposito; Fabio Verginelli; Sonia Toracchio; Sandra Mammarella; Laura De Lellis; Cinzia Vanni; Antonio Russo; Renato Mariani-Costantini; Alessandro Cama
Journal:  Oncol Rep       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 3.906

View more
  2 in total

1.  Association of IRS1 Gly972Arg and IRS2 Gly1057Asp polymorphisms with gastric cancer in Turkish subjects.

Authors:  Gokhan Gorgisen; Ugur Karatas; Can Ates; Murat Oksuz; Ismail Musab Gulacar
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 2.  IL-4 and IL-13 Receptor Signaling From 4PS to Insulin Receptor Substrate 2: There and Back Again, a Historical View.

Authors:  Achsah D Keegan; Jose Zamorano; Aleksander Keselman; Nicola M Heller
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 7.561

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.