Literature DB >> 32669097

LncRNA MEG3 rs3087918 was associated with a decreased breast cancer risk in a Chinese population: a case-control study.

Yi Zheng1,2, Meng Wang3, Shuqian Wang2, Peng Xu3, Yujiao Deng1,2, Shuai Lin3, Na Li1,2, Kang Liu4, Yuyao Zhu1,2, Zhen Zhai1,2, Ying Wu1,2, Zhijun Dai5,6, Gaixia Zhu7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: LncRNA MEG3 expressed abnormally in various cancers including breast cancer, but no studies reported the correlation between MEG3 SNPs and breast cancer susceptibility among Chinese women.
METHODS: This study is aimed to explore the association between three SNPs of MEG3 (rs3087918, rs7158663, rs11160608) and breast cancer. The study is a population-based case-control study including 434 breast cancer patients and 700 healthy controls. Genotyping was performed using Sequenom MassArray technique. Function prediction of rs3087918 were based on RNAfold and lncRNASNP2 databases.
RESULTS: Pooled analysis indicated that rs3087918 was related to a decreased risk of breast cancer [GG vs. TT: OR (95%) = 0.67(0.45-0.99), P = 0.042; GG vs. TT + TG: OR (95%) = 0.69(0.48-0.99), P = 0.046], especially for women aged <=49 [GG vs. TT: OR (95%) = 0.40(0.22-0.73), P = 0.02]. Comparison between case groups showed genotype GG and TG/GG of rs3087918 were associated with her-2 receptor expression [GG vs. TT: OR (95%) = 2.37(1.24-4.63), P = 0.010; TG + GG vs. TT: OR (95%) = 1.50(1.01-2.24), P = 0.045]. We didn't find statistical significance for rs11160608, rs7158663 and breast cancer. Structure prediction based on RNAfold found rs3087918 may influence the secondary structure of MEG3. The results based on lncRNASNP2 indicated that rs3087918 may gain the targets of hsa-miR-1203 to MEG3, while loss the target of hsa-miR-139-3p and hsa-miR-5091 to MEG3.
CONCLUSIONS: MEG3 rs3087918 was associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer. MEG3 haplotype TCG may increase the risk of breast cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Case-control study; MEG3; SNP; miRNA

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32669097      PMCID: PMC7362410          DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07145-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


Background

Breast cancer (BC) is a serious threat to women’s health. According to American cancer statistics 2020 [1], there will be an estimated 276,480 new BC cases and 42,170 BC related death in 2020. For females, BC is the most common diagnosed cancer (24.2% of the total cases) and the leading cause of cancer death (15.0% of the total cancer death). Although epidemiological studies have identified several risk factors involved in BC, such as age, hormonal state, and family history [2], the pathogenesis of BC is still unclear. BC is a complex and genetically heterogeneous disease in which genetic changes such as abnormal amplification of oncogenes, or deletion/mutation of tumor suppressor genes, play a substantial role [3-5]. Maternally expressed gene 3 (MEG3) is an imprinted gene located at chromosome 14q32.3 in humans, encoding a long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) belonging to the imprinted DLK1-MEG3 regions [6]. This region contains at least three paternally expressed protein coding genes and numerous maternally expressed noncoding RNAs [7]. The imprinted expression of these genes was related to cell development and growth [8], and experiments in vitro indicated MEG3 can suppress the proliferation of human cancer cells lines [9]. Researchers found loss of MEG3 related to a variety of human cancers, such as gastric [10], cervical [11], and breast [12] cancer. MEG3 can inhibit the occurrence of tumor through various aspects. Firstly, MEG3 can inhibit the proliferation of tumor cells and consequently induce apoptosis, which has been confirmed by in vitro experiments and animal models [13]. Secondly, MEG3 plays a role in epigenetic regulation and can alter the function of cancer cells by affecting DNA methylation and regulating the functions of snoRNA and miRNA [14, 15]. Moreover, MEG3 is involved in the regulation of many tumor-related signaling pathways, including p53, MDM2, and pRb pathway [16]. Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) mainly refers to the DNA sequence polymorphism caused by the variation of a single nucleotide at the genome level. It is the most common genetic variant in the human genome, accounting for 90% of all known polymorphisms [17]. To date, Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) and multiple large-scale sequencing have identified many SNPs in more than 70 genes associated with breast cancer [18, 19]. SNP has been considered a potential biomarker of genetic background to predict risk, progression, and treatment response to various diseases. Previous investigation indicated that several SNPs in MEG3 genes are associated with breast cancer susceptibility [20]. However, there are no investigation to explore the relationship between MEG3 polymorphisms and breast cancer among Chinese women. In this study, we genotyped three polymorphisms (rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663) in MEG3 gene based on 434 BC patients and 700 healthy controls, to explore their relationship with breast cancer.

Methods

Study subjects

In total, 1134 females were recruited for this population-based case-control study. Among these, 434 breast cancers were enrolled in the Department of Oncology, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Xi’an Jiaotong University, from 2013 to 2015. Seven hundred healthy females were randomly recruited from medical center of the same hospital during the same period. All BC patients were diagnosed by pathology and detailed immunohistochemical analysis. BC patients who had a history of other malignant diseases or receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy were excluded. The controls were matched to cases by age (±2 years) and had no history of malignant tumors, no history of chemoradiotherapy, no obvious abnormality in blood routine examination. The protocol of this study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University Shaanxi Province (Xi’an, China). All patients gave written informed consent prior to participation in the study.

SNP selection and genotyping

SNPs were selected from NCBI dbSNP database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/SNP) and relevant literature [20-22] according to the following criteria. First, the minor allele frequency (MAF) was no less than 0.05 among Chinese population. Secondly, the SNPs located in the 5′- flanking region, 5′ untranslated region, 3′ untranslated region, and exon of MEG3 gene. We finally chose three MEG3 SNPs rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663 to study. Peripheral blood samples were collected in EDTA-coated tubes and conserved at − 80 °C. Genome DNA were extracted from whole blood samples using ComWin BloodGen Mini Kit (QIAGEN, China, Beijing). Ultraviolet spectrophotometer (Nanodrop, Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) was utilized to measure the purity and concentration of extracted DNA. We designed multiplexed SNP MassEXTEND assay using Sequenom MassARRAY Assay Design 3.0 software. DNA samples were genotyped by Sequenom MassARRAY RS1000 according to the standard protocol. The primers applied for the three SNPs were shown in Supplemental Table S1.

Statistical analysis

The HWE of the three SNPs were calculated using Fisher’s exact test in controls group. Student’s t test was adopted to evaluated the difference of age distribution and body mass index (BMI) between BC patients and healthy controls. Two-sided Pearson’s chi-square tests were applied to access the differences in the categorical variables between cases and controls, such as age (<=49 and > 49), BMI, menstrual-status, and allelic frequencies. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We also calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using logistic regression analysis. Haplotype analysis were conducted by Haploview 4.2. Other statistical analyses were performed using the version R 3.5.2 software.

Function prediction based on databases

We used RNAfold (http://rna.tbi.univie.ac.at//cgi-bin/RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) and LncRNASNP2 (http://bioinfo.life.hust.edu.cn/lncRNASNP/) database to predict the effect of SNP on MEG3. RNAfold is a classic database to predict RNAs structure. Free energy represents the amount of energy that needs to be injected to change the structure. The smaller the corresponding value is, the more stable the structure will be. LncRNASNP2 is a novel database containing 7,260,238 SNPs on 141,353 human lncRNA transcripts and 3,921,448 SNPs on 117,405 mouse lncRNA transcripts [23]. We used this database to predict the potential function of the MEG3 polymorphisms.

Results

Demographical and clinical information of study population

This study contained 434 BC cases and 700 healthy control. All the subjects were Han Chinses women from northwest China. There were no statistically significant differences in age distribution, BMI and menopausal status between the patients and the control group. The detail demographical and clinical information was display in Table 1. BMI was a statistical index to estimate the body fat in people of any age. In this study, BMI was divided into four levels (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese) based on Chinese reference standard.
Table 1

Demographic information

CharacteristicsCases (%)Controls (%)P value
Number434700
Age (mean ± SD)51.95 ± 10.3551.83 ± 17.280.879a
≦49180 (41.5)298 (42.6)
>49254 (58.5)402 (57.4)0.716
BMI, kg/m2 (mean ± SD)22.38 ± 2.6122.71 ± 4.000.084a
Menopausal status
Premenopausal157 (36.2)188 (41.8)
Postmenopausal277 (63.8)262 (58.2)0.506
TNM Stage
 I114 (26.3)
 II192 (44.2)
 III89 (20.5)
 IV39 (9)
Immunohistochemistry results
 ER142 (32.7)
+292 (67.3)
 PR189 (43.5)
+245 (56.5)
 Her-2250 (57.6)
+184 (42.4)

BMI: body mass index, ER: estrogen receptor, PR: progesterone receptor, Her-2: human epidermal growth factor receptor-2

a Student’s t-test

Demographic information BMI: body mass index, ER: estrogen receptor, PR: progesterone receptor, Her-2: human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 a Student’s t-test

The associations between MEG3 SNPs and BC risk

Three SNP in MEG3 gene (rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663) were genotyped in all recruited subjects, and their detected rate were 99.1, 99.2 and 99.4%, respectively. The genotype distribution of the three polymorphisms in control groups accorded with HWE (rs11160608: P = 0.844; rs3087918: P = 0.968; rs7158663: P = 0.334). We didn’t find statistical significance for rs11160608, rs7158663 and breast cancer (P > 0.05 in all genetic models). Pooled analysis indicated that rs3087918 was related to a decreased risk of breast cancer [GG vs. TT: OR (95%CI) = 0.67(0.45–0.99), P = 0.042; GG vs. TT + TG: OR (95% CI) = 0.69(0.48–0.99), P = 0.046]. The detail results were showed in Table 2.
Table 2

Association between MEG3 gene polymorphisms and risk of breast cancer (rs11160608, rs3087918, rs7158663)

SNPs genetic modelGenotypeCases (%)N = 434Controls (%)N = 700OR (95%CI)P value
rs11160608
 Co-dominantAA126 (29.7)227 (32.4)reference
AC218 (51.4)341 (48.7)1.15 (0.87–1.52)0.316
CC80 (18.9)132 (18.9)1.09 (0.77–1.55)0.625
 DominantAA126 (29.7)227 (32.4)reference
AC + CC298 (70.3)473 (67.6)1.14 (0.87–1.48)0.342
 RecessiveAA+AC344 (81.1)568 (81.1)reference
CC80 (18.9)132 (18.9)1.00 (0.74–1.36)0.996
 AlleleA470 (55.4)795 (56.8)reference
C378 (44.6)605 (43.2)1.06 (0.89–1.26)0.528
rs3087918
 Co-dominantTT171 (40.2)259 (37.0)reference
TG207 (48.7)334 (47.7)0.94 (0.72–1.22)0.633
GG47 (11.1)107 (15.3)0.67 (0.45–0.99)0.042*
 DominateTT171 (40.2)259 (37.0)reference
TG + GG254 (59.8)441 (63.0)0.87 (0.68–1.12)0.279
 RecessiveTT + TG378 (88.9)593 (84.7)reference
GG47 (11.1)107 (15.3)0.69 (0.48–0.99)0.046*
 AlleleT549 (64.6)852 (60.9)reference
G301 (35.4)548 (39.1)0.85 (0.71–1.02)0.077
rs7158663
 Co-dominateGG224 (52.5)403 (0.6)reference
GA170 (39.8)250 (0.4)1.22 (0.95–1.58)0.12
AA33 (7.7)47 (0.1)1.26 (0.79–2.03)0.333
 DominateGG224 (52.5)403 (0.6)reference
GA + AA203 (47.5)297 (0.4)1.23 (0.97–1.57)0.094
 RecessiveGG + GA394 (92.3)653 (0.9)reference
AA33 (7.7)47 (0.1)1.16 (0.73–1.85)0.52
 AlleleG618 (72.4)1056 (75.4)reference
A236 (27.6)344 (24.6)1.17 (0.97–1.42)0.107

OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval

*The P Value < 0.05

Association between MEG3 gene polymorphisms and risk of breast cancer (rs11160608, rs3087918, rs7158663) OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval *The P Value < 0.05

Stratified analysis by age, BMI and menopausal status

Then, we conducted stratified analysis based on age, BMI and menopausal status to further explore their effect on relationship between BC susceptibility and the three SNPs in MEG3. BMI was divided into two levels (BMI < 24 kg/m2 and BMI > = 24 kg/m2). No association was found between rs11160608, rs7158663 and breast cancer when stratified by age, BMI and menopausal status (Supplemental Table S2). Rs3087918 was related to a reduced susceptibility for women aged <=49 [GG vs. TT: OR (95%CI) = 0.40(0.22–0.73), P = 0.02] (Table 3).
Table 3

Stratified Analysis of rs3087918 by age, BMI and menopausal status

Grouprs3087918 (Case/Control)
TTTGGGTG + GG
Age
  < =4969/9387/14119/64106/205
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.83 (0.55–1.25)0.40 (0.22–0.73)0.70 (0.47–1.03)
P-value0.3780.002*0.069
  > 49102/166120/19328/43148/236
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)1.01 (0.72–1.42)1.06 (0.62–1.81)1.02 (0.74–1.41)
P-value0.9450.8320.901
BMI (kg/m2)
  < 24134/206147/25435/74182/328
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.89 (0.66–1.20)0.73 (0.46–1.15)0.85 (0.64–1.13)
P-value0.4410.1710.271
  > =2437/5360/8012/3372/113
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)1.07 (0.63–1.84)0.52 (0.24–1.14)0.91 (0.55–1.53)
 P-value0.7940.1000.727
Menstrual-status
 postmenopausal114/167128/20129/65157/266
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.93 (0.67–1.29)0.65 (0.40–1.08)0.87 (0.64–1.18)
P-value0.6750.0930.356
 menstruating57/9279/13318/4297/175
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.96 (0.62–1.48)0.69 (0.36–1.32)0.90 (0.59–1.35)
P-value0.8480.2600.597

BMI: body mass index, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval

*The P Value < 0.05

Stratified Analysis of rs3087918 by age, BMI and menopausal status BMI: body mass index, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval *The P Value < 0.05

Relationship between MEG3 rs3087918 and clinical characteristics of BC

To further explore the effect of rs3087918 loci and clinicopathological information on BC susceptibility, correlation analysis was conducted in the cases group defined by age, BMI, menopausal status, tumor size, metastasis, clinical stage, ER/PR status and Her-2. As showed in Table 4, there is a significant association of the GG genotype with tumor size according to the 95%CI (1.01–3.92), while the P value of tumor size is 0.05. In this study, P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Thus, we considered there was no association found between GG genotype of rs3087918 and tumor size. This is a controversial result that needs further study to clarify. GG and TG + GG genotypes were associated with the over-expression of Her-2 [GG vs. TT: OR (95%CI) = 2.37(1.24–4.63), P = 0.010; TG + GG vs. TT: OR (95%CI) = 1.50(1.01–2.24), P = 0.045]. We further divided the cases into luminal, Her-2 and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) groups according to molecular classification. However, we found no association between three SNPs of MEG3 and the different molecular typing states of BC (Supplemental Table S3).
Table 4

Relationship between MEG3 rs3087918 and clinical characteristics of cases

rs3087918TTTGGGTG + GG
Age
  > 49/<=49102/69120/8728/19148/106
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.93 (0.62–1.408)1.00 (0.52–1.95)0.94 (0.64–1.40)
P-value0.7420.9930.777
BMI (kg/m2)
  > =24/< 2437/13460/14712/3572/182
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)1.48 (0.92–2.37)1.24 (0.59–2.63)1.43 (0.91–2.26)
P-value0.1040.5710.120
Menstrual status
 yes/no114/57128/7929/18157/97
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.81 (0.53–1.24)0.81 (0.42–1.59)0.81 (0.54–1.21)
P-value0.3300.5260.307
Tumor size (cm)
  > 2/<=285/86107/10031/16138/116
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)1.08 (0.72–1.62)1.96 (1.01–3.92)1.20 (0.82–1.73)
P-value0.7010.0500.350
Metastasis
 Positive/negtive93/78104/10324/23128/126
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.85 (0.56–1.27)0.88 (0.46–1.68)0.85 (0.58–1.26)
P-value0.4220.6860.419
Clinical Stage
 III-IV/I-II51/12059/14816/3175/179
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.94 (0.60–1.47)1.21 (0.60–2.39)0.99 (0.65–1.51)
P-value0.7780.5790.948
ER
 Positive/negtive115/56138/6933/14171/83
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.97 (0.63–1.50)1.15 (0.58–2.37)1.00 (0.66–1.51)
P-value0.9040.7000.988
PR
 Positive/negtive94/77112/9533/14145/109
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)0.97 (0.64–1.45)1.93 (0.98–3.97)1.09 (0.74–1.61)
P-value0.8670.0630.666
Her-2
 Positive/negtive62/10990/11727/20117/137
 OR(95%CI)1.00 (reference)1.35 (0.89–2.05)2.37 (1.24–4.63)1.50 (1.01–2.24)
P-value0.1550.01*0.045*

BMI: body mass index, ER: estrogen receptor, PR: progesterone receptor, Her-2: human epidermal growth factor receptor-2, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval

*The P Value < 0.05

Relationship between MEG3 rs3087918 and clinical characteristics of cases BMI: body mass index, ER: estrogen receptor, PR: progesterone receptor, Her-2: human epidermal growth factor receptor-2, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval *The P Value < 0.05

Haplotype analysis of MEG3 SNPs and associations with the risk of BC

To explore the combined effect the three SNPs in MEG3, we performed haplotype analysis by Haploview. The results of the haploid analysis indicated that TCG haplotype may increase the risk of breast cancer compared with the wild haplotype TAG [OR (95%CI) = 2.97(1.66–5.31), P < 0.001]. Other haplotypes showed no association with BC (Table 5). The order of the three SNPs was rs3087918, rs11160608 and rs7158663.
Table 5

Haplotype analysis of MEG3 rs3087918

HaplotypesControl (%)Case (%)OR (95%)P
TAG293 (41.89)155 (37.44)reference
GCG206 (29.89)105 (25.36)0.96 (0.71–1.31)0.811
TAA94 (13.89)67 (16.18)1.35 (0.93–1.95)0.113
GCA57 (8.89)33 (7.97)1.09 (0.68–1.75)0.707
TCG21 (3.89)33 (7.97)2.97 (1.66–5.31)< 0.001*

The order of the three SNPs was rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663. Haplotypes with frequency less than 0.03 were excluded. OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval

*The P Value < 0.05

Haplotype analysis of MEG3 rs3087918 The order of the three SNPs was rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663. Haplotypes with frequency less than 0.03 were excluded. OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval *The P Value < 0.05

The function prediction of the rs3087918 in MEG3

We used RNAfold (http://rna.tbi.univie.ac.at//cgi-bin/RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) and LncRNASNP2 (http://bioinfo.life.hust.edu.cn/lncRNASNP/) database to predict the potential function of rs3078918. The centroid secondary structure of rs3087918 was shown in Fig. 1, we learned that mutant allele “G” would significantly change the centroid secondary structure of MEG3. Moreover, its minimum free energy was change from − 28.87 kcal to − 26.90 kcal/mol, which suggests rs3087918 may increase the structural stability of MEG3. The results of LncRNASNP2 indicated that rs3087918 may gain the targets of hsa-miR-1203 to MEG3 (lncRNA ID: NONHSAT039760.2), while loss the target of hsa-miR-139-3p and hsa-miR-5091 to MEG3 (See Supplemental Table S4 and Figure S1).
Fig. 1

The RNAfold algorithm in silico predicting the impact of rs3087918. MFE: minimum free energy

The RNAfold algorithm in silico predicting the impact of rs3087918. MFE: minimum free energy

Discussion

The occurrence of breast cancer is a result of a long-term complex interaction between individual genetic background and environmental exposure factors. As the most common type of genetic mutation, SNP is of great significance for breast cancer risk, diagnosis, individualized treatment and prognosis prediction. This study is aimed to investigate the association between MEG3 polymorphisms (rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663) and breast cancer. Our study recruited 1134 subjects containing 434 breast cancer patients and 700 healthy controls. The results indicated that the mutant homozygous GG of rs3087918 may associated with a decreased risk of BC, especially in females age < = 49. Comparison between case groups showed genotype GG and TG/GG of rs3087918 were correlated with her-2 receptor expression. The results of haplotype analysis for MEG3 showed that compared with wild haploid TAG, TCG haplotype may increase the risk of breast cancer, while other haplotypes were not significantly correlated with breast cancer risk. Furthermore, we found rs3087918 may influence the secondary structure of MEG3 and affect the bind of MEG3 to some miRNAs. Previous evidences showed that MEG3 was highly expressed in normal tissues such as brain, pituitary, placenta and adrenal gland, and its transcripts can be detected in several human organs including ovary, testes, spleen, pancreas, liver, and mammary gland [7]. However, the expression of MEG3 was lower in various human tumors compared with that in normal human tissues, including breast cancer [24]. MEG3 was recognized as a tumor suppressor deponed on recent researches. In vitro experiments showed that restoring the expression of MEG3 could inhibit cancer cells proliferation and induce their apoptosis [25], and a similar tumor inhibition effect was found in nude mice [16]. MEG3 can also participate in epigenetic regulation of transcripts in the MEG3 region, such as DNA methylation [26, 27], snoRNA/microRNA regulation [28-31]. It is also reported that SNPs in MEG3 gene have an influence on cancer risk. For example, Hou et al. observed a statistically significant increased risk between MEG3 rs11160608 and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) [24]. And Bayarmaa et al. found MEG3 polymorphisms were related to the chemotherapy response and toxicity of paclitaxel and cisplatin in breast cancer patients [32]. Moreover, Yang et al. found MEG3 rs7158663 have no association with lung cancer, while MEG3 rs4081134 was significantly influence the susceptibility of lung cancer in the Chinese population [33]. In this study, we found MEG3 rs3087918 was associated with a decreased breast cancer risk. We use a database named LncRNASNP2 (http://bioinfo.life.hust.edu.cn/lncRNASNP/) to predict the potential function of rs3087918 on MEG3 gene. The results indicated that rs3087918 may influence MEG3 binding to miRNAs. In detail, rs3087918 may gain the targets of hsa-miR-1203 to MEG3, while loss the target of hsa-miR-139-3p and hsa-miR-5091 to MEG3. A study performed by Tomoyuki Okumura et al. found has-miR-1203 significantly associated with tumor recurrence [34]. Downregulation of has-miR-139-3p could induce cancer cell migration and invasion [35-37], and a pooled analysis proved that high has-miR-139-3p expression was related to a better prognosis for hepatocellular carcinoma [38]. Thus, has-miR-139-3p was attributed as a tumor suppressor [39]. Hsa-miR-5091 was also reported as a biomarker with better prognosis for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [40]. These were coincident with our results that rs3087918 was related to a decreased risk of breast cancer. To be best of our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the association between MEG3 SNPs (rs3087918, rs11160608 rs7158663) and breast cancer risk. However, there are some potential limitations need to be clarified. First, we failed to consider the potential influence of environmental, lifestyle and other unknow risk factors on our study. Secondly, this is a one center case-control study with a small sample scale, we should not ignore the selective bias. In the future, more complete and larger sample scale study need to accomplish.

Conclusion

The wild-type homozygous GG of MEG3 rs3087918 was associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer. MEG3 haplotype TCG may increase the risk of breast cancer and it may owe to its effect on the structure and function of MEG3. Additional file 1: Figure S1. The prediction results of s3087918 affect the bind of MEG3 to miRNAs. (A) rs3087918 caused has-miR1203 target gain; (B) rs3087918 caused has-miR-139-3p target loss; (C) rs3087918 caused has-miR-5091 target loss. Table S1. Primers used for this study. Table S2. Stratified Analysis of rs11160608 and rs7158663 by age, BMI and menopausal status. Table S3. Association analysis between three SNPs inMEG3 and Molecular typing of breast cancer. Table S4. Rs3087918 influence MEG3 binding to miRNAs based on LncRNASNP2 database.
  40 in total

1.  Role of Host miRNA Hsa-miR-139-3p in HPV-16-Induced Carcinomas.

Authors:  M K Sannigrahi; Rajni Sharma; Varinder Singh; Naresh K Panda; Vidya Rattan; Madhu Khullar
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  State of the evidence 2017: an update on the connection between breast cancer and the environment.

Authors:  Janet M Gray; Sharima Rasanayagam; Connie Engel; Jeanne Rizzo
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 5.984

3.  Affluence and Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Steven Lehrer; Sheryl Green; Kenneth E Rosenzweig
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Promoter hypermethylation of the MEG3 (DLK1/MEG3) imprinted gene in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Leonidas Benetatos; Aggeliki Dasoula; Eleftheria Hatzimichael; Ioannis Georgiou; Maria Syrrou; Konstantinos L Bourantas
Journal:  Clin Lymphoma Myeloma       Date:  2008-06

Review 5.  Environmental chemicals and breast cancer: An updated review of epidemiological literature informed by biological mechanisms.

Authors:  Kathryn M Rodgers; Julia O Udesky; Ruthann A Rudel; Julia Green Brody
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 6.498

6.  Genome-wide association analysis of more than 120,000 individuals identifies 15 new susceptibility loci for breast cancer.

Authors:  Kyriaki Michailidou; Jonathan Beesley; Sara Lindstrom; Sander Canisius; Joe Dennis; Michael J Lush; Mel J Maranian; Manjeet K Bolla; Qin Wang; Mitul Shah; Barbara J Perkins; Kamila Czene; Mikael Eriksson; Hatef Darabi; Judith S Brand; Stig E Bojesen; Børge G Nordestgaard; Henrik Flyger; Sune F Nielsen; Nazneen Rahman; Clare Turnbull; Olivia Fletcher; Julian Peto; Lorna Gibson; Isabel dos-Santos-Silva; Jenny Chang-Claude; Dieter Flesch-Janys; Anja Rudolph; Ursula Eilber; Sabine Behrens; Heli Nevanlinna; Taru A Muranen; Kristiina Aittomäki; Carl Blomqvist; Sofia Khan; Kirsimari Aaltonen; Habibul Ahsan; Muhammad G Kibriya; Alice S Whittemore; Esther M John; Kathleen E Malone; Marilie D Gammon; Regina M Santella; Giske Ursin; Enes Makalic; Daniel F Schmidt; Graham Casey; David J Hunter; Susan M Gapstur; Mia M Gaudet; W Ryan Diver; Christopher A Haiman; Fredrick Schumacher; Brian E Henderson; Loic Le Marchand; Christine D Berg; Stephen J Chanock; Jonine Figueroa; Robert N Hoover; Diether Lambrechts; Patrick Neven; Hans Wildiers; Erik van Limbergen; Marjanka K Schmidt; Annegien Broeks; Senno Verhoef; Sten Cornelissen; Fergus J Couch; Janet E Olson; Emily Hallberg; Celine Vachon; Quinten Waisfisz; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Muriel A Adank; Rob B van der Luijt; Jingmei Li; Jianjun Liu; Keith Humphreys; Daehee Kang; Ji-Yeob Choi; Sue K Park; Keun-Young Yoo; Keitaro Matsuo; Hidemi Ito; Hiroji Iwata; Kazuo Tajima; Pascal Guénel; Thérèse Truong; Claire Mulot; Marie Sanchez; Barbara Burwinkel; Frederik Marme; Harald Surowy; Christof Sohn; Anna H Wu; Chiu-chen Tseng; David Van Den Berg; Daniel O Stram; Anna González-Neira; Javier Benitez; M Pilar Zamora; Jose Ignacio Arias Perez; Xiao-Ou Shu; Wei Lu; Yu-Tang Gao; Hui Cai; Angela Cox; Simon S Cross; Malcolm W R Reed; Irene L Andrulis; Julia A Knight; Gord Glendon; Anna Marie Mulligan; Elinor J Sawyer; Ian Tomlinson; Michael J Kerin; Nicola Miller; Annika Lindblom; Sara Margolin; Soo Hwang Teo; Cheng Har Yip; Nur Aishah Mohd Taib; Gie-Hooi Tan; Maartje J Hooning; Antoinette Hollestelle; John W M Martens; J Margriet Collée; William Blot; Lisa B Signorello; Qiuyin Cai; John L Hopper; Melissa C Southey; Helen Tsimiklis; Carmel Apicella; Chen-Yang Shen; Chia-Ni Hsiung; Pei-Ei Wu; Ming-Feng Hou; Vessela N Kristensen; Silje Nord; Grethe I Grenaker Alnaes; Graham G Giles; Roger L Milne; Catriona McLean; Federico Canzian; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Petra Peeters; Eiliv Lund; Malin Sund; Kay-Tee Khaw; Marc J Gunter; Domenico Palli; Lotte Maxild Mortensen; Laure Dossus; Jose-Maria Huerta; Alfons Meindl; Rita K Schmutzler; Christian Sutter; Rongxi Yang; Kenneth Muir; Artitaya Lophatananon; Sarah Stewart-Brown; Pornthep Siriwanarangsan; Mikael Hartman; Hui Miao; Kee Seng Chia; Ching Wan Chan; Peter A Fasching; Alexander Hein; Matthias W Beckmann; Lothar Haeberle; Hermann Brenner; Aida Karina Dieffenbach; Volker Arndt; Christa Stegmaier; Alan Ashworth; Nick Orr; Minouk J Schoemaker; Anthony J Swerdlow; Louise Brinton; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Wei Zheng; Sandra L Halverson; Martha Shrubsole; Jirong Long; Mark S Goldberg; France Labrèche; Martine Dumont; Robert Winqvist; Katri Pylkäs; Arja Jukkola-Vuorinen; Mervi Grip; Hiltrud Brauch; Ute Hamann; Thomas Brüning; Paolo Radice; Paolo Peterlongo; Siranoush Manoukian; Loris Bernard; Natalia V Bogdanova; Thilo Dörk; Arto Mannermaa; Vesa Kataja; Veli-Matti Kosma; Jaana M Hartikainen; Peter Devilee; Robert A E M Tollenaar; Caroline Seynaeve; Christi J Van Asperen; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Katarzyna Jaworska; Tomasz Huzarski; Suleeporn Sangrajrang; Valerie Gaborieau; Paul Brennan; James McKay; Susan Slager; Amanda E Toland; Christine B Ambrosone; Drakoulis Yannoukakos; Maria Kabisch; Diana Torres; Susan L Neuhausen; Hoda Anton-Culver; Craig Luccarini; Caroline Baynes; Shahana Ahmed; Catherine S Healey; Daniel C Tessier; Daniel Vincent; Francois Bacot; Guillermo Pita; M Rosario Alonso; Nuria Álvarez; Daniel Herrero; Jacques Simard; Paul P D P Pharoah; Peter Kraft; Alison M Dunning; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Per Hall; Douglas F Easton
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 38.330

7.  A global reference for human genetic variation.

Authors:  Adam Auton; Lisa D Brooks; Richard M Durbin; Erik P Garrison; Hyun Min Kang; Jan O Korbel; Jonathan L Marchini; Shane McCarthy; Gil A McVean; Gonçalo R Abecasis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Upregulation of the lncRNA Meg3 induces autophagy to inhibit tumorigenesis and progression of epithelial ovarian carcinoma by regulating activity of ATG3.

Authors:  Yin-Ling Xiu; Kai-Xuan Sun; Xi Chen; Shuo Chen; Yang Zhao; Qing-Guo Guo; Zhi-Hong Zong
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-05-09

9.  Genome-scale analysis to identify prognostic microRNA biomarkers in patients with early stage pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Xiwen Liao; Xiangkun Wang; Ketuan Huang; Chengkun Yang; Tingdong Yu; Chuangye Han; Guangzhi Zhu; Hao Su; Rui Huang; Tao Peng
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 3.989

10.  Associations between lncRNA MEG3 polymorphisms and neuroblastoma risk in Chinese children.

Authors:  Zhen-Jian Zhuo; Ruizhong Zhang; Jiao Zhang; Jinhong Zhu; Tianyou Yang; Yan Zou; Jing He; Huimin Xia
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 5.682

View more
  6 in total

1.  MAGCNSE: predicting lncRNA-disease associations using multi-view attention graph convolutional network and stacking ensemble model.

Authors:  Ying Liang; Ze-Qun Zhang; Nian-Nian Liu; Ya-Nan Wu; Chang-Long Gu; Ying-Long Wang
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 3.307

2.  Novel Contribution of Long Non-coding RNA MEG3 Genotype to Prediction of Childhood Leukemia Risk.

Authors:  Jen-Sheng Pei; Wen-Shin Chang; Chao-Chun Chen; Mei-Chin Mong; Shih-Wei Hsu; Pei-Chen Hsu; Yuan-Nian Hsu; Yun-Chi Wang; Chia-Wen Tsai; DA-Tian Bau
Journal:  Cancer Genomics Proteomics       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.069

Review 3.  The Role of Long Non-Coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in Female Oriented Cancers.

Authors:  Faiza Naz; Imran Tariq; Sajid Ali; Ahmed Somaida; Eduard Preis; Udo Bakowsky
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Impacts of LOC105371267 Variants on Breast Cancer Susceptibility in Northern Chinese Han Females: A Population-Based Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Linna Peng; Congmei Huang; Shishi Xing; Dandan Li; Chunjuan He; Yongjun He; Wei Yang; Tianbo Jin; Li Wang
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 4.375

Review 5.  Functional interplay between long non-coding RNAs and the Wnt signaling cascade in osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Jieyu He; Lin Ling; Zhongyue Liu; Xiaolei Ren; Lu Wan; Chao Tu; Zhihong Li
Journal:  Cancer Cell Int       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 5.722

6.  The Association of MEG3 Gene rs7158663 Polymorphism With Cancer Susceptibility.

Authors:  Xueren Gao; Xianyang Li; Shulong Zhang; Xiaoting Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 6.244

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.