| Literature DB >> 28415599 |
Ying Zhu1, Kan Zhai2, Juntao Ke1, Jiaoyuan Li1, Yajie Gong1, Yang Yang1, Jianbo Tian1, Yi Zhang1, Danyi Zou1, Xiating Peng1, Jing Gong1, Rong Zhong1, Kun Huang3, Jiang Chang1, Xiaoping Miao1.
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease with limited prognostic marker. BRAC1 and BRCA2 are two classic tumor suppressor genes which play an important role in DNA repair. Somatic mutations and germline genetic variants on BRCA1/2 have been found associated with the tumorigenesis of pancreatic cancer. However, the correlations between BRCA1/2 polymorphism and pancreatic cancer prognosis remained unknown. In this study, we genotyped three tag missense variants on BRCA1/2 in 603 sporadic pancreatic cancer patients in a Chinese population. We found rs1799966 on BRCA1 was associated with poor prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients with hazard ratio being 1.23 (95% CI: 1.09-1.40, P = 0.0010). Further stratification analyses showed that significant correlation was particularly in locally advanced stage patients with hazard ratio being 1.36 (95% CI: 1.13-1.64, P = 0.0014), but not in patients in local stage (P = 0.1139) or metastatic stage (P = 0.5185). Two missense variants (rs766173 and rs144848) on BRAC2 showed no significant correlation with pancreatic cancer patients' overall survival. In conclusion, we identified a germline missense variant on BRAC1 significantly associated with poor prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients with locally advanced stage. These results may contribute to the precision medicine of this disease.Entities:
Keywords: BRCA; SNP; pancreatic cancer; prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28415599 PMCID: PMC5482636 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16422
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Selected characteristics and overall survival of study subjects
| No. (%) | MST | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Vital status | |||
| Dead | 523 (86.7) | ||
| Alive | 80 (13.3) | ||
| Gender | 0.6639 | ||
| Male | 369 (61.2) | 7.3 | |
| Female | 234 (38.8) | 7.4 | |
| Age‡ | 0.0848 | ||
| ≤ 61 | 309 (51.2) | 7.7 | |
| > 61 | 294 (48.8) | 7.1 | |
| Smoking status | 0.1920 | ||
| Yes | 140 (23.2) | 7.0 | |
| No | 463 (76.8) | 7.5 | |
| Drinking status | 0.7561 | ||
| Yes | 108 (17.9) | 7.6 | |
| No | 495 (82.1) | 7.3 | |
| Clinical stage | < 0.0001 | ||
| Local | 137 (22.7) | 13.7 | |
| Locally advanced | 268 (44.5) | 8.1 | |
| Metastatic | 198 (32.8) | 4.4 |
Note: MST, median survival time (months).
†P values were calculated using the log-rank test.
‡Median age was 61 years among all cases.
Figure 1Linkage disequilibrium (LD) of SNPs at the BRCA1/2 gene locus
rs766173 and rs1799944 on BRCA2 are in complete linkage disequilibrium (LD), but independent with the rest SNP rs144848. Four SNPs (rs1799966, rs16942, rs16941 and rs799917) on BRCA1 are in complete LD. The LD plot was based on 1000 genome phase 3 data among the Han Chinese in Beijing (CHB). White diamond indicates hardly no evidence of LD (r2 = 0.028), while red indicates strong evidence (r2 = 1).
Association between variants on BRCA1/2 and PDAC prognosis
| SNP, Gene | No. (%) | MST | HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs766173, | ||||
| AA | 487 (80.6) | 7.4 | 1.00 (Reference) | |
| AC | 112 (18.6) | 7.3 | 1.01 (0.81–1.26) | 0.9302 |
| CC | 4 (0.7) | 12.0 | 1.15 (0.43–3.10) | 0.7767 |
| Additive model | 1.02 (0.83–1.25) | 0.8579 | ||
| rs144848, | ||||
| AA | 327 (54.2) | 7.7 | 1.00 (Reference) | |
| AC | 235 (39.0) | 7.1 | 1.08 (0.90–1.30) | 0.3924 |
| CC | 41 (6.8) | 6.8 | 1.23 (0.86–1.76) | 0.2644 |
| Additive model | 1.10 (0.96–1.27) | 0.1798 |
Note: SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; MST, median survival time (months); HR, hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.
†P values were calculated using Cox regression adjusting for gender, age, smoking, drinking status and clinical stage.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival by rs1799966 (A), rs766173 (B) and rs144848 (C) genotypes. P values were calculated using Log-rank test for trend in an additive model.
Stratification analyses of rs1799966 with PDAC patients’ prognosis in different stages
| No. (%) | MST | HR (95% CI)† | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local disease ( | ||||
| AA | 49 (35.8) | 15.0 | 1.00 (Reference) | |
| AG | 69 (50.3) | 13.7 | 1.07 (0.67–1.69) | 0.7858 |
| GG | 19 (13.9) | 8.8 | 1.70 (0.93–3.13) | 0.0869 |
| Additive model | 1.28 (0.94–1.74) | 0.1139 | ||
| Metastatic disease ( | ||||
| AA | 86 (43.4) | 4.6 | 1.00 (Reference) | |
| AG | 88 (44.5) | 4.4 | 1.25 (1.92–1.71) | 0.1534 |
| GG | 24 (12.1) | 4.0 | 0.99 (0.61–1.61) | 0.9703 |
| Additive model | 1.07 (0.87–1.32) | 0.5185 |
Note: MST, median survival time (months); HR, hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.
†P values were calculated using Cox regression adjusting for gender, age, smoking and drinking status.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier curves by rs1799966 genotypes in different disease stages
P values were calculated using Log-rank test for trend in an additive model in patients with local stage (A), locally advanced stage (B) and metastatic stage (C), respectively.