Literature DB >> 29910622

Association of VDR gene TaqI polymorphism with the susceptibility to prostate cancer in Asian population evaluated by an updated systematic meta-analysis.

Liangliang Chen1, Junjun Wei1, Shuwei Zhang1, Zhongguan Lou1, Xue Wang1, Yu Ren1, Honggang Qi1, Zhenhua Xie1, Yirun Chen1, Feng Chen1, Qihang Wu1, Xiaoxiao Fan1, Honglei Xu1, Shuaishuai Huang1, Guobin Weng1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The vitamin D receptor (VDR) plays a key role in vitamin-mediated signaling pathway. Emerging evidence has suggested that the VDR polymorphism may contribute to the risk of prostate cancer (PCa). However, the existing results are not conclusive in Asian population.
METHODS: We aim to evaluate the potential role of VDR polymorphisms on PCa of Asian population. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wang Fang Data, and VIP Periodical were retrieved, and eligible studies (case-control or cohort study) meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated through an updated meta-analysis using Stata13.0 software.
RESULTS: A total of 1,363 cases and 2,101 controls obtained from 13 eligible publications were eventually included in this meta-analysis. Our results show that a significant association of VDR taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk, especially in the Japanese population. In the clinical stage-stratified analysis, the pooled results revealed no significant difference in genetic polymorphisms between the local stage and control groups, whereas there was increased frequency of T allele and TT genotype in the advanced tumor stage group compared with local tumor stage or control groups. Similarly, no significant difference was seen in Gleason <7 and control groups, but the T allele and TT genotype were significantly higher in the Gleason ≥7 group compared with Gleason <7 or control groups.
CONCLUSION: The VDR TaqI polymorphism might be associated with PCa risk in Asian population, especially in the Japanese population. Also, PCa patients carrying the T allele or TT genotype were more likely to progress to advanced stage. These results suggest that VDR TaqI polymorphisms may be potential diagnostic biomarkers for PCa susceptibility.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical stage; meta-analysis; polymorphism; prostate cancer; vitamin D receptor

Year:  2018        PMID: 29910622      PMCID: PMC5987782          DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S151002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Onco Targets Ther        ISSN: 1178-6930            Impact factor:   4.147


Background

Prostate cancer (PCa), is one of the most common malignant tumors and the second leading cause of male mortality worldwide. In the USA, a total number of 180,890 new cases and 26,120 deaths occurred in 2016.1 Although the pathogenesis of PCa is not clearly elucidated, age, ethnicity, and genetic factors are believed to contribute to the occurrence of PCa.2 Some reports suggested that low levels of vitamin D in serum might be a risk factor for PCa.3 The hormonally active metabolite of vitamin D, 1,25(OH)2D3 (calcitriol), shows an anti-proliferative effect on many PCa cell lines.2,4,5 The transformation of vitamin D to calcitriol requires the binding of vitamin D receptor (VDR) and the complex of vitamin D-VDR-retinoid X receptor complex to regulate the cell proliferation, cell cycle, and apoptosis-related genes.6 High levels of VDR mediate the activation of vitamin D as active vitamin D [1,25 (OH)2D3], which could inhibit the proliferation of normal prostate tissue and PCa epithelial cells, thus inhibiting the growth of PCa cells.4 This discovery suggested that the variation in VDR gene affects the prognosis or risk of PCa. TaqI, one of the most extensive single-nucleotide polymorphisms located in exon 9 of VDR gene might alter VDR mRNA levels. This is through regulation of mRNA stability and the protein translation efficiency, which may be responsible for the reduction in VDR level.7–9 Currently, existing evidence is insufficient to draw robust conclusions.10,11 Three previous meta-analyses have identified that there are no positive results in VDR TaqI polymorphism and PCa development,7,12,13 while study of Fei et al showed an inversed result in Asian population. Regrettably, no further subgroup analysis was conducted in different countries.14 The inclusion of population with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) as control group is noted, and a relation of VDR TaqI polymorphism to BPH risk was also reported in some other studies. Our study considered the subjects as 1) healthy group, 2) BPH group, and 3) case group. Four new studies have provided additional data.15–18 We, therefore, conducted an updated meta-analysis to investigate the role of VDR TaqI polymorphism and PCa risk.

Methods

Literature and research strategy

PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wang Fang data, and VIP Periodical were searched using the following terms: (“Polymorphisms”) and (“vitamin D receptor” OR “vitamin D3 receptor” OR “1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 receptor” OR “calcitriol receptor” OR “VDR””) and (“PCa” OR “prostate neoplasm” OR “prostate tumor” OR “prostate carcinoma” OR “prostatic neoplasm”). Articles related to the association of VDR Taq1 polymorphisms and Asian PCa risk were obtained. Various combinations of the terms were also used in other databases. Literature search data were last updated on October 10, 2016. No limitations were attached.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

In this meta-analysis, it was a must for selected studies to meet the following criteria: Studies that performed the associations of VDR Taq1 genetic polymorphisms and PCa; Study objects belonged to the Asian population; Local stage PCa was defined as clinical and pathological stage of T1–T2N0M0 or stage A–B; advanced PCa was defined as tumor invasion outside the prostate envelope or cancer metastasis to the lymph nodes or other organ tissue, clinical pathological stage for T3–T4NxMx or TxN1 or M1; stage C and D; Gleason stage: low grade (Gleason <7) and high grade (Gleason ≥7); The odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs could be calculated or provided through detailed genotype data in case–control, cohort groups, and GWAS studies. Exclusion criteria: No detailed genotype data or the raw data were available for retrieval; Comments, review articles, editorials, and other meta-analysis; For multiple publications from the same population/area, only the largest sample was included.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data of eligible studies were extracted independently by 2 independent reviewers, including the following contents: name of first author, year of publication, country of origin, characteristics of cases and controls, number of cases and controls, sources of controls, pathologic diagnosis, clinical pathologic staging, Gleason score, and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Extracted data with discrepancies in identification were discussed to reach a consensus. A third investigator assisted by adjudicating the disagreements if dissent still existed.

Evaluation of the eligible studies’ quality

We used the NOS to evaluate each in accordance with the requirements of article quality, NOS score a total of 9 points, while each indicator score 1 point. If the score >4 points, it was considered to be a high quality article.19

Statistical analysis

We evaluated the pooled OR and 95% CI to indicate the relationship between VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism and susceptibility to PCa by Z-test, with P < 0.05 considering as statistically significant. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was carried out by the Q statistic (significance level of P < 0.1) and I2 statistic (>50% as evidence of significant inconsistency).20,21 The Q-test and I2 statistic were applied to determine the effect models according to heterogeneity. When P-value of heterogeneity (P) was no >0.1 (P ≤ 0.1), random effects model was used, and when P was >0.1, fixed effects model was used.22 Sensitivity analysis was also tested by removing 1 study at a time, to evaluate the effect of removal and effect of size of each study on the homogeneity of the whole. In addition, subgroup analyses were stratified by countries, cancer stages, and Gleason stages. Publication bias was investigated with Begg’s funnel plots and further assessed by the Egger’s regression test.23,24 When an asymmetric plot was shown or Egger’s test was P < 0.05, we considered it as a significant publication bias. Besides, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was implemented to identify the effective records in our study. All analyses were performed with Stata 13.0 software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). A 2-tailed P ≤ 0.05 was regarded as significant, except for specified conditions, for which a certain P-value was declared.

Results

Study selection and characteristics

A flow diagram of literature research and process is shown in Figure 1. Each study was retrieved and carefully reviewed according to the inclusive and exclusive criteria. Ultimately, a total of 13 articles reporting the relationship between Taq1 polymorphisms and PCa risk in Asian population were identified through both English and Chinese databases,15–18,25–33 including 1,363 cases and 2,101 controls (including healthy and BPH). Quality of each included article was evaluated by NOS, and each had a score of ≥5, meaning a high quality, as listed in Table 1. In addition, we found that 3 studies did not meet HWE.15,25,33 We found no significant changes of the pooled results after excluding each article once.
Figure 1

Study flowchart for the process of selecting the final 13 studies.

Abbreviation: VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Table 1

Characteristics of selected studies in this meta-analysis

NoStudy, yearCountryCharacteristics of case and controls
Genotyping methodHWECancer evaluationNOSTotal sample size
Genotype
Case
Control
CaseControlsCaseControlTTTtttTTTttt
1Furuya et al,26 1999JapanNAWithout any tumors, no-BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.384TNM566604125041181
2Watanabe et al,25 1999JapanALLWithout any tumors, inclusion of BPH and non-BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.034TNM6100202 (202 BPH)80182160366
3Habuchi et al,27 2000JapanALLWithout any tumors, inclusion of BPH and non-BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.205NO7222337 (209 BPH)176442253813
4Hamasaki et al,28 2001JapanALLWithout any tumors, no BPH, age-matched, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.061TNM Gleason51151339122291348
5Hamasaki et al,15 2002JapanALLWithout any tumors, inclusion of BPH and non-BPH, age-matched, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.033TNM Gleason6110173 (83 BPH)87212123419
6Suzuki et al,16 2003JapanALLWithout any tumors, no BPH, confirmed by PCa screening, 2 control subjects had a family history of PCaPCR-RFLP0.545TNM Gleason6811055920283202
7Huang et al,29 2004ChinaALLWithout any tumors, no BPH, age-matched, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.332TNM Gleason7160205146140179260
8Liu et al,17 2004ChinaALLWithout any tumors, inclusion of BPH and non-BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP, DHPLC0.442TNM Gleason7103226 (112 BPH)93100204220
9Chaimuangraj et al,30 2006ThailandALLWithout any tumors, inclusion of BPH and non-BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.871NO62874 (30 BPH)226059141
10Onsory et al,31 2008IndiaALLWithout any tumors, no BPHPCR-SSCP0.393NO51001005540543489
11Bai et al,18 2009ChinaALLWithout any tumors, age matched, no BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR-RFLP0.683TNM Gleason812213011210012190
12Hu et al,32 2014ChinaALLWithout any tumors, no BPH, confirmed by PCa screeningPCR0.581TNM Gleason710824296102219221
13Yousaf et al,33 2014PakistanALLWithout any tumors, no BPHPCR-RFLP0.035NO64811427134761132

Notes: NA indicated as relative data were not available in original studies. ALL indicated as prostate cancer cases were confirmed by histologically diagnosis. PCa screening included PSA test and DRE, and/or TRUS, and/or prostate biopsy. NO indicated as the study is neither stratified by Gleason stage nor by TNM stage.

Abbreviations: BPH, benign prostatic hyperplasia; DHPLC, detected by high-performance liquid chromatography; DRE, digital rectal examination; HWE, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; PCa, prostate cancer; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism; SSCP, single-strand conformation polymorphism; TRUS, transrectal ultrasound.

Association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in Asian population

A total of 13 eligible articles, including 1,363 cases and 2,101 controls (including non-BPH and BPH) were analyzed the association between Taq1 polymorphism of VDR and PCa risk in Asian population. As is presented in Table 2, TaqI genetic polymorphism was significantly associated with the risk of PCa (T vs t: OR [95% CI]=1.23 [1.05–1.44], P=0.010; TT vs tt: OR [95% CI]=1.99 [1.20–3.30], P=0.008; [TT/Tt] vs tt: OR [95% CI]=2.03 [1.24–3.34], P=0.005); (Figure 2A, D and G). Begg’s test revealed no publication bias (Figure 2B, E and H), and the sensitivity analysis was stable (Figure 2C, F and I).
Table 2

Meta-analysis of the association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk with different groups in Asian population

GeneStudies
Test for overall effect
Heterogeneity
MPublication bias
NOR (95% CI)Z-scoreP-valueI2P-valueBegg’s testEgger’s test
Case vs all control
 T vs t131.23 (1.05–1.44)2.560.0100%0.460F0.1270.092
 TT vs Tt131.09 (0.91–1.31)0.960.33023.4%0.207F0.0240.024
 TT vs tt131.99 (1.20–3.30)2.670.0080%0.681F0.0490.126
 TT vs (Tt/tt)131.17 (0.98–1.40)1.770.0760%0.581F0.1000.057
 (TT/Tt) vs tt132.03 (1.24–3.34)2.800.0050%0.634F0.0740.136
Case vs non-BPH control
 T vs t61.54 (1.20–1.98)3.420.00118.8%0.291F1.0000.446
 TT vs Tt61.41 (1.06–1.87)2.390.0170%0.503F0.7070.479
 TT vs tt63.53 (1.40–8.94)2.670.0080%0.905F0.7340.606
 TT vs (Tt/tt)61.51 (1.15–1.98)2.930.0039.6%0.355F1.0000.493
 (TT/Tt) vs tt63.15 (1.25–7.94)2.430.0150%0.933F0.7340.614
BPH vs non-BPH Control
 T vs t3a1.68 (0.92–3.09)a1.68a0.093a60.6%a0.079aRa1.000a0.438a
 TT vs Tt3a1.67 (0.80–3.47)a1.36a0.173a62.9%a0.068aRa1.000a0.423a
 TT vs tt42.86 (0.91–8.99)1.800.0730%0.897F0.2960.111
 TT vs (Tt/tt)3a1.75 (0.85–3.58)a1.52a0.128a64.3%a0.061aRa1.000a0.436a
 (TT/Tt) vs tt42.41 (0.77–7.54)1.520.1290%0.853F0.2960.056

Note:

Liu et al’s17 study was excluded.

Abbreviations: BPH, benign prostatic hyperplasia; F, fixed effects model; M, effect model of meta-analysis; OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; R, random effects model; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Figure 2

ORs, Begg’s test and Galbraith blot test of PCa and VDR Taq1 polymorphisms.

Note: T vs t (A–C), TT vs tt (D–F) and (TT/Tt) vs tt (G–I) were analyzed by fixed effects analysis.

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; SE, standard error; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Previous study suggested that the inclusion of population with BPH as control group may bias the pooled results to a varying degree.14 In order to draw attention to this point, we divided the control into 2 groups, BPH and non-BPH control. As a result, a marked association was performed with Taq1 polymorphism and PCa risk in the case vs non-BPH subgroup (T vs t: OR [95% CI]=1.54 [1.20–1.98], P=0.001; TT vs Tt: OR [95% CI]=1.41 [1.06–1.87], P=0.017; TT vs tt: OR [95% CI]=3.53 [1.40–8.94], P=0.008; TT vs [Tt/tt]: OR [95% CI]=1.51 [1.15–1.98], P=0.003; [TT/Tt] vs tt: OR [95% CI]=3.15 [1.25–7.94], P=0.015; Figure 3A, D, G, J and M), while no significant difference was found between BPH and non-BPH subgroup. The results revealed that VDR Taq1 polymorphism was not associated with BPH. Begg’s test revealed no publication bias, and the sensitivity analysis was stable (Table 2 and Figure 3).
Figure 3

ORs, Begg’s test and Galbraith blot test of case vs non-BPH as control.

Note: T vs t (A–C), TT vs Tt (D–F), TT vs tt (G–I), TT vs (Tt/tt) (J–L) and (TT/Tt) vs tt (M–O) were analyzed by fixed models.

Abbreviations: BPH, benign prostatic hyperplasia; OR, odds ratio.

Association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in different Asian countries

We performed a subgroup analysis according to different Asian countries. As shown in Figure 4 and Table 3, the pooled results indicated that VDR TaqI genetic polymorphism was closely linked with PCa risk in Japanese population (T vs t: OR [95% CI]=1.23 [1.0–1.51], P=0.049; TT vs tt: OR [95% CI]=2.04 [1.00–4.16], P=0.048), while no association was shown in Chinese (4 studies), Pakistan (1 study), India (1 study), and Thailand (1 study) population. Begg’s test revealed no publication bias (Figure 4B and E), and the sensitivity analysis represented a good stability (Figure 4C and F).
Figure 4

ORs, Begg’s test and Galbraith blot test of PCa and VDR Taq1 polymorphisms in Japanese population.

Note: T vs t (A–C), TT vs tt (D–F) were analyzed by fixed effects analysis.

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Table 3

Meta-analysis of the association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in Asian different countries

GeneStudiesTest for overall effect
Heterogeneity
MPublication bias
OR (95% CI)Z-scoreP-valueI2P-valueBegg’s testEgger’s test
China
 T vs t41.02 (0.70–1.47)0.090.9290%0.544F0.7340.646
 TT vs Tt41.10 (0.75–1.63)0.500.6180%0.720F0.3080.093
 TT vs tt40.22 (0.02–2.45)1.230.218
 TT vs (Tt/tt)41.06 (0.72–1.56)0.300.7620%0.638F0.7340.335
 (TT/Tt) vs tt40.22 (0.02–2.45)1.230.218
Japan
 T vs t61.23 (1.00–1.51)1.970.04932.1%0.195F0.260.394
 TT vs Tt61.14 (0.90–1.44)1.070.2870.40%0.413F0.260.190
 TT vs tt62.04 (1.00–4.16)1.960.0480%0.728F0.260.708
 TT vs (Tt/tt)61.20 (0.95–1.50)1.540.12421.8%0.270F0.260.287
 (TT/Tt) vs tt61.97 (0.97–4.02)1.870.0610%0.777F0.260.810
India
 T vs t11.48 (0.96–2.28)1.760.079
 TT vs Tt11.53 (0.86–2.74)1.450.147
 TT vs tt12.30 (0.72–7.37)1.400.160
 TT vs (Tt/tt)11.62 (0.93–2.83)1.690.090
 (TT/Tt) vs tt11.88 (0.61–5.82)1.090.274
Thailand
 T vs t11.01 (0.37–2.73)0.020.984
 TT vs Tt10.87 (0.30–2.55)0.250.800
 TT vs tt11.13 (0.05–28.9)0.080.939
 TT vs (Tt/tt)10.89 (0.31–2.59)0.210.831
 (TT/Tt) vs tt11.16 (0.05–29.4)0.090.927
Pakistan
 T vs t11.47 (0.84–2.57)1.340.180
 TT vs Tt10.30 (0.12–0.75)2.570.010
 TT vs tt12.84 (0.92–8.78)1.810.070
 TT vs (Tt/tt)10.90 (0.44–1.83)0.290.769
 (TT/Tt) vs tt13.68 (1.22–11.1)2.310.021

Note: “–” indicates no data.

Abbreviations: F, fixed effects model; M, effect model of meta-analysis; OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in different tumor and Gleason stages

According to the clinical pathological and Gleason stages, we performed a subgroup analysis to delineate the association of VDR gene Taq1 genetic polymorphism with PCa risk in more detail. As shown in Table 4, in the clinical stage subgroup analysis, the pooled results revealed no significant association in local stage, but more frequency of T allele and TT genotype in the advanced group compared with control or local group (advanced group vs control group: T vs t: OR [95% CI]=1.62 [1.16–2.25], P=0.004; TT vs Tt: OR [95% CI]=1.59 [1.10–2.29], P=0.013; TT vs [Tt/tt]: OR [95% CI]=1.80 [1.25–2.61], P=0.002; advanced group vs local group: T vs t: OR [95% CI]=1.56 [1.02–2.38], P=0.041; TT vs Tt: OR [95% CI]=2.10 [1.33–3.31], P=0.001; TT vs [Tt/tt]: OR [95% CI]=1.68 [1.07–2.62], P=0.023; Table 4 and Figure 5).
Table 4

Meta-analysis of the association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in different tumor stages

GeneStudiesTest for overall effect
Heterogeneity
MPublication bias
OR (95% CI)Z-scoreP-valueI2P-valueBegg’s testEgger’s test
Local vs control
 T vs t51.02 (0.74–1.40)0.100.9240%0.721F0.8060.754
 TT vs Tt60.77 (0.55–1.09)1.470.1410%0.727F0.7070.291
 TT vs tt51.93 (0.60–6.22)1.100.2733.3%0.376F0.7340.437
 TT vs (Tt/tt)60.90 (0.65–1.25)0.610.5450%0.959F0.7070.580
 (TT/Tt) vs tt61.77 (0.63–4.93)1.080.2780%0.521F0.4620.282
Advanced vs control
 T vs t51.62 (1.16–2.25)2.860.00449%0.097F0.4620.762
 TT vs Tt61.59 (1.10–2.29)2.480.01349.8%0.076F1.0000.901
 TT vs tt52.18 (0.80–5.90)1.530.1260%0.949F1.0000.412
 TT vs (Tt/tt)61.80 (1.25–2.61)3.130.00227.5%0.228F0.1330.111
 (TT/Tt) vs tt61.98 (0.80–4.83)1.470.1420%0.994F0.8060.691
Advanced vs local
 T vs t51.56 (1.02–2.38)2.040.0410%0.798F1.0000.660
 TT vs Tt62.10 (1.33–3.31)3.200.00119.5%0.286F1.0000.901
 TT vs tt50.64 (0.13–3.12)0.550.5820%0.726F0.2960.028
 TT vs (Tt/tt)61.68 (1.07–2.62)2.270.0230%0.557F0.2600.102
 (TT/Tt) vs tt60.78 (0.20–2.87)0.400.6860%0.666F1.0000.387

Abbreviations: F, fixed effects model; M, effect model of meta-analysis; OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Figure 5

ORs of PCa associated with VDR Taq1 polymorphisms in different tumor stages.

Notes: T vs t (A, B), TT vs Tt (C, D) and TT vs (Tt/tt) (E, F) were analyzed by fixed effects analysis. (A, C, E: Advanced vs Control; B, D, F: Advanced vs Local).

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

As shown in Table 5, in the Gleason subgroup analysis, the combined results showed no significant association between Gleason <7 vs control group, but the T allele and TT genotype were significantly higher in Gleason ≥7 group than control group or Gleason <7 (Table 5 and Figure 6).
Table 5

Meta-analysis of the association of VDR gene Taq1 polymorphism with PCa risk in different Gleason stages

GeneStudiesTest for overall effect
Heterogeneity
MPublication bias
OR (95% CI)Z-scoreP-valueI2P-valueBegg’s testEgger’s test
Gleason < 7 vs control
 T vs t41.31 (0.96–1.78)1.680.0930%0.617F0.0890.057
 TT vs Tt51.14 (0.81–1.62)0.760.4490%0.927F0.2210.146
 TT vs tt42.20 (0.81–5.93)1.550.1210%0.384F0.2960.081
 TT vs (Tt/tt)51.18 (0.85–1.62)0.990.3220%0.717F0.0860.120
 (TT/Tt) vs tt42.10 (0.78–5.66)1.470.1410%0.397F0.2960.067
Gleason ≥ 7 vs control
 T vs t2a4.32 (1.85–10.1)a3.39a0.001a0%a0.499aFa1.000a
 TT vs Tt3a2.21 (0.80–6.12)a1.52a0.128a58.7%a0.089aRa0.296a0.066a
 TT vs tt32.89 (0.51–16.6)1.190.2326.2%0.302F1.000
 TT vs (Tt/tt)3a2.94 (1.45–5.96)a2.98a0.003a45.5%a0.159aFa1.000a0.309a
 (TT/Tt) vs tt32.61 (0.45–15.2)1.060.2880%0.402F1.000
Gleason ≥ 7 vs Gleason < 7
 T vs t2a3.69 (1.51–9.01)a2.87a0.004a0%a0.712aFa1.000a
 TT vs Tt41.78 (0.98–3.25)1.890.05948.3%0.122F1.0000.840
 TT vs tt32.71 (0.34–21.6)0.940.3460%0.878F1.000
 TT vs (Tt/tt)41.87 (1.04–3.37)2.080.03747.4%0.127F1.0000.414
 (TT/Tt) vs tt32.63 (0.32–21.7)0.900.3690%0.974F1.000

Notes:

Suzuki et al’s16 study was excluded. “–” indicates no data.

Abbreviations: F, fixed effects model; M, effect model of meta-analysis; OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; R, random effects model; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Figure 6

ORs of PCa associated with VDR Taq1 polymorphisms in different Gleason stages.

Notes: T vs t (A, B) and TT vs (Tt/tt) (C, D) were analyzed by fixed effects analysis. (A, C: Gleason $7 vs Control; B, D: Gleason ≥7 vs Gleason <7).

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; PCa, prostate cancer; VDR, vitamin D receptor.

Sensitivity and heterogeneity analysis

Sensitivity analysis was performed to test data stability by omitting one study at a time. The significance of all ORs was unchanged. A sensitivity analysis indicated that an independent study by Liu et al17 was the principal reference for heterogeneity of TaqI polymorphism in the development of BPH. After the exclusion of this study, we found it did not reduce the between-study heterogeneity obviously, and the outcome remained no statistical significance in the development of BPH (Table 2). In the subgroup analysis of Gleason ≥7 vs Control or Gleason ≥7 vs Gleason <7, the sensitivity analysis indicated that an independent study by Suzuki et al16 was the principal reference for heterogeneity of TaqI polymorphism in Gleason stage. After the exclusion of this study, the heterogeneity was effectively decreased or was eliminated (Table 5).

Discussion

Studies have shown that VDR Taq1 polymorphisms were associated with susceptibility to several carcinomas, such as breast cancer, oral cancer, and PCa.34–37 However, the association between VDR Taq1 genetic polymorphisms and PCa risk is still controversial, which may be caused by unscientific research or insufficient subjects and control numbers used in studies. In a study of Taylor et al, which included 96 cases of PCa and 162 non-BPH controls, they revealed that subjects carrying tt genotype have lower risk of PCa compared with TT/Tt genotype (OR = 0.32, 95% CI =0.15–0.75, P < 0.01).8 Recently, similar results were also reported in studies by Liu et al,38 Guo et al,39 and Bonilla et al40, while 3 other studies12,41,42 showed different conclusions. To evaluate the association of VDR Taq1 genetic polymorphisms and susceptibility to PCa in Asian population, a comprehensive study of the previous research was performed by an updated systematic meta-analysis, which is the newest and most complete. In the study of Fei et al,14 they mentioned that inclusion of population with BPH as control may bias the results. So we divided the subjects as 1), healthy, 2), BPH, and 3), case group. Combined analysis of 4 studies suggested no significant correlation between Taq1 VDR polymorphism and BPH risk. Besides, we conducted a subgroup analysis according to different Asian countries, which is an important biological factor that may affect the function of VDR by gene interaction. Interestingly, no association was shown except in the Japanese population. These inconsistent phenomena in different Asian countries may be a result of discrepant environmental conditions. According to the different classification methods, TNM stage is based on the size of tumor diameter, lymph node metastasis, and distant metastasis staging, while Gleason stage is based on the degree of gland differentiation and tumor growth in the interstitial tissue.43 These 2 methods are independent, but could be complementary to assess the risk of cancer. Fei et al’s study showed the genotypes TT and TT/Tt were significantly higher in the advanced PCa group compared with the control group, indicating that T allele is risker and easier to advanced stage,14 which was consistent with our results (Table 4 and Figure 5), while no statistically significant difference was shown according to Gleason staging. But in our study, we found a higher frequency of T allele gene and TT genotype in the Gleason ≥7 stage PCa compared with Gleason <7 or Control, suggesting that PCa patients carrying T allele and TT genotype are more prone to entering an advanced stage (Table 5 and Figure 6). Moreover, there are several limitations of this meta-analysis. 1) Observational studies are susceptible to a wide variety of biases, such as genotyping errors, allelic heterogeneity, and selection bias; 2) in some studies, lack of clear explanation for the pathologic diagnostic results of subjects. The pathogenesis of sporadic PCa differs with hereditary PCa, which may lead to inevitable selection bias; 3) the conclusions of Gleason staging subgroup analyses might be limited because of a low statistical power of the small sample size; and 4) besides genetic polymorphisms, many factors, such as occupation, diet, smoking, age, and other confounding factors might contribute to the development of PCa.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that the VDR TaqI polymorphism might be associated with PCa risk in Asian male population, especially in the Japanese population. Moreover, PCa patients carrying T allele and TT genetype more easily progress to advanced stage. Therefore, these results indicate a high specificity and valuable biomarker to detect potential PCa in Asian population. Further steps should be taken to evaluate the gene-to-gene and gene-to-environment combined effect, and the total population and/or selected populations with different environmental background are urgently needed to conduct large scale multi-center epidemiological studies.
  40 in total

1.  Significance of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism for prostate cancer risk in Japanese.

Authors:  M Watanabe; K Fukutome; M Murata; H Uemura; Y Kubota; J Kawamura; R Yatani
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1999 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.480

2.  Lack of association of VDR polymorphisms with Thai prostate cancer as compared with benign prostate hyperplasia and controls.

Authors:  Suchart Chaimuangraj; Ratdumrong Thammachoti; Boonsong Ongphiphadhanakul; Witaya Thammavit
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2006 Jan-Mar

3.  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

4.  Meta-analysis of the relation between the VDR gene TaqIpolymorphism and genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer in Asian populations.

Authors:  Ya-Jie Guo; Ze-Ming Shi; Jun-Da Liu; Ning Lei; Qiu-Hong Chen; Ying Tang
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2012

5.  Fok1 polymorphism of vitamin D receptor gene contributes to breast cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chunbo Tang; Ning Chen; Mingyue Wu; Hua Yuan; Yifei Du
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Prediction of bone density from vitamin D receptor alleles.

Authors:  N A Morrison; J C Qi; A Tokita; P J Kelly; L Crofts; T V Nguyen; P N Sambrook; J A Eisman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1994-01-20       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism in familial prostate cancer in a Japanese population.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Suzuki; Hiroshi Matsui; Nobuaki Ohtake; Seiji Nakata; Tomoyuki Takei; Hidekazu Koike; Haruki Nakazato; Hironobu Okugi; Masaru Hasumi; Yoshitatsu Fukabori; Kohei Kurokawa; Hidetoshi Yamanaka
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.369

8.  Association of prostate cancer with vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism.

Authors:  J A Taylor; A Hirvonen; M Watson; G Pittman; J L Mohler; D A Bell
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1996-09-15       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  Association of vitamin D receptor polymorphisms with the risk of prostate cancer in the Han population of Southern China.

Authors:  Yongheng Bai; Yaping Yu; Bin Yu; Jianrong Ge; Jingzhang Ji; Hong Lu; Jia Wei; Zhiliang Weng; Zhihua Tao; Jianxin Lu
Journal:  BMC Med Genet       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 2.103

10.  Polymorphisms of vitamin D receptor gene TaqI susceptibility of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiawei Fei; Nannan Liu; Huifeng Li; Yanting Shen; Jianming Guo; Zhenqi Wu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  1 in total

1.  Genetic Polymorphisms of Vitamin D Receptor Gene are Associated with Cervical Cancer Risk in Northeastern Thailand.

Authors:  Sophida Phuthong; Wannapa Settheetham-Ishida; Sitakan Natphopsuk; Takafumi Ishida
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2020-10-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.