Literature DB >> 32951271

A case-control study on the SNP309T → G and 40-bp Del1518 of the MDM2 gene and a systematic review for MDM2 polymorphisms in the patients with breast cancer.

Amin Jalilvand1, Kheirollah Yari1,2, Mozaffar Aznab3, Zohreh Rahimi1, Iman Salahshouri Far4, Pantea Mohammadi1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The current research was conducted to study the association between the SNP309 and del1518 polymorphisms with the breast cancer in the patients with the Kurdish ethnic background from western Iran. Also, a systematic review of the relevant case-control studies on the MDM2 polymorphisms in the patients with breast cancer was performed.
METHODOLOGY: Two mL of peripheral blood was taken from 100 patients with breast cancer and 100 healthy individuals. The frequencies of MDM2 SNP309 and del1518 genotypes and alleles were determined using the PCR-RFLP and PCR methods, respectively.
RESULTS: The frequency of the TT, TG, and GG of MDM2-SNP309 genotypes in the patients was obtained as 23%, 52%, and 25%, and they were equal to 22%, 40%, and 38% in the control group, respectively. Also, considering the MDM2-del1518 polymorphism, the frequencies of ins/ins, ins/del, and del/del genotypes were equal to 52%, 41%, and 7% in the breast cancer group and they were equal to 62, 30, and 8% in the control group, respectively. Analysis of the results indicated that the GG genotype plays a protective role for the breast cancer in the recessive model (GG vs TT + TG) of SNP309 (χ2  = 3.916, P = .048, and OR = 0.54).
CONCLUSION: Our findings revealed that the GG genotype of MDM2-SNP309 can play a protective role in the breast cancer disease. Also, our systematic review indicated that the SNP309, SNP285, and del1518 of MDM2 gene in different populations mostly did not have a significant association with the risk of breast cancer.
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Del1518 variant; Iranian population; MDM2 gene; SNP309 polymorphism; Systematic review

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32951271      PMCID: PMC7755803          DOI: 10.1002/jcla.23529

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal        ISSN: 0887-8013            Impact factor:   3.124


INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer (BC), as the most common type of cancer in the women, is a multi‐factorial and heterogeneous malignancy in the world. , , The crude incidence rate of BC in the Iranian women has raised from 24 cases in 2004 to 33.8 cases per 100 000 in 2018. , , This cancer is caused by the interaction effects of the genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors. , , Exposure to the carcinogen agents, ionizing radiation, diet, physical activity or exercise, gender, woman's hormonal history, age, and obesity are the main effective risk factors for the breast cancer. , Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the functional genes could influence the incidence of breast cancer and its progression. , , Results of a recent meta‐analysis and research studies have confirmed a correlation between the SNPs of candidate genes with the risk of breast cancer. Main cellular regulatory mechanisms for the arrest of cell cycle and apoptosis in the stressed or damaged cells are involved in the cancer susceptibility. The p53 is a primary regulatory factor that can be expressed in response to the increased expression of oncogenic proteins in the stressed conditions of the cells. , , Under normal conditions, it is important to keep the p53 at the low level, so human homologue of mouse double minute 2 (MDM2) is a negative regulator of the p53 reducing the p53 level in the cell. The MDM2 controls the expression level of the p53 using two mechanisms: Firstly, it prevents the transcriptional activity of p53 through direct binding as a physical blocker. Secondly, it can be degraded by the proteasome through the ubiquitination of the p53. , , , , Mono‐ubiquitination causes the p53 to transfer from the nucleus to the cytoplasm and ultimately to be degraded by the proteasome, while poly‐ubiquitination targets p53 cause the degradation with the proteasome in the nucleus. There are controversial findings regarding the association of the SNP309 and del1518 of the MDM2 gene with the breast cancer in different populations. On the other hand, there are big ethnicities in the Iran's population. Also, the frequency and association of these two main polymorphisms of the MDM2 gene together have not been investigated in the patients with breast cancer among the Kurdish population so far. Therefore, the current study was conducted for the first time to investigate the SNP309T>G and del1518 of the MDM2 gene in the patients with breast cancer and healthy individuals with the Kurdish ethnic background from western Iran. Also, a systematic review was designed and the case‐control studies on evaluating the effect of all the investigated MDM2 variations on the breast cancer risk were perused for the first time.

PATIENTS AND METHODOLOGY

Patients

Two mL of the blood samples in tubes was obtained from every 100 patients with breast cancer (mean age ± SD of 48 ± 11 years old, with the age range of 24‐71 years old) and 100 age‐matched (≤5 years) healthy individuals as the control group, with no history of cancer. The sampling was carried out from September 2017 to May 2018. Patients with a history of other types of cancer and fibroadenoma were excluded from the study. Also, all the cases and controls had the Kurdish ethnicity and were from the western Iran. Information on the age onset of the disease, first‐degree family history of breast cancer, and a first‐degree family of other types of cancer, estrogen receptor (ER), HER's‐2 expression, progesterone receptor (PgR), P53, Ki‐67, lymph node metastasis, and tumor grade was obtained from the patients̕ medical history. Tumor grading was carried out according to the pathologists̕ report. HER‐2 was tested by the immunohistochemistry (IHC) method, and the samples with score of 2+ were then checked by the FISH protocol. Scores of 3+ and 2+ with the positive FISH report were recorded as the HER‐2 positive. The sample size of the study was defined based on the MDM2 genotype frequency data presented in the studies by Akisik et al (2011) and Alshatwi et al (2012) using the following formula: A sample size of ~80 was calculated for each study group considering the alpha value of 0.01 and beta value of 0.05, but to ensure regarding the sample adequacy, a sample size of 100 was studied in each group.

Selection of the SNPs and bioinformatics analysis

The SNPs were selected based on the reported studies on the main polymorphisms in the promoter region of the MDM2 gene in the different populations of breast cancer worldwide. Also, the selected SNPs were checked in some web servers and online prediction tools. SNP309T>G (rs2279744) and del1518 (rs3730485) were checked by the Variant Effect Predictor (Ensembl Tools) (https://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Tools/VEP), rSNPBase 3.1 (http://rsnp3.psych.ac.cn/), SNP Function Prediction (https://snpinfo.niehs.nih.gov/snpinfo/snpfunc.html), TFBIND (http://tfbind.hgc.jp/), and MethPrimer 2.0 (http://www.urogene.org/methprimer2/).

DNA extraction

DNA was extracted from the blood samples using the DNA extraction kit based on the manufacturer's instructions (Zagros Bioidea Co., Iran). Concentration and purity of the extracted DNA were evaluated using a NanoDrop (Thermo‐2000/2000c, USA).

Genotype analysis

The PCR‐RFLP and PCR techniques were carried out to investigate the distribution of MDM2 SNP309 and del1518 genotypes, respectively. The final volume was equal to 25 μL for each PCR process, containing 12 μL of Master Mix PCR (SinaClon Co., Iran), 100‐500 ng of the extracted DNA and 400 nmol/L of each specific primer. , The sequences of the primers were checked and confirmed using the UCSC In‐Silico PCR (http://genome.ucsc.edu/). Amplification conditions of the SNP309 were as follows: first denaturation cycle at 95°C and 5 minutes, 40 cycles: 35 seconds at 94°C, 35 seconds at 59°C and 30 seconds at 72°C, followed by a final extension (72°C for 10 minutes). Also, PCR parameters for del1518 were as follows: initial denaturation cycle for 5 minutes at 94°C, then 35 cycles: 30 seconds at 94°C, 30 seconds at 58°C, 30 seconds at 72°C, followed by a final extension cycle for 10 minutes at 72°C. The amplified fragment of MDM2‐SNP309 with 352 bps was digested by two units of restriction enzyme, MspA1I (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA) for 15 hour of incubation period at 37°C. Then, the obtained fragments of MDM2‐SNP309 and amplified products of MDM2‐del1518 were electrophoresed on the 2% and 2.5% agarose gels and were stained by the GelRed, respectively. An amount of 5% of MDM2‐SNP309 and MDM2‐del1518 genotypes in the patients was randomly selected and identified by the DNA sequencer (BiONEER, South Korea).

Statistical analysis

Frequencies of the genotypes in the studied SNPs were analyzed using the online Hardy‐Weinberg equilibrium calculator. The genotype frequencies were compared using the Pearson's chi‐squared test in the IBM SPSS software (version 16). Analysis of the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were done by the online MedCalc statistical software (MedCalc, Ostend, Belgium). Haplotype analysis was carried out using a web‐based application. The analysis of the age onset of the disease was done by the one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

Search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data extraction

The relevant papers were selected from the PubMed and Scopus databases. A time limit was set in the searches up to August 7, 2019 (last updated search). The terms of (MDM2 OR "mouse double minute 2" OR "murine double minute 2" OR HDM2) and (breast) and (polymorphism OR SNP OR variant) were used to search in the Scopus database, and the used terms in the PubMed database were (MDM2 OR mouse double minute 2 homolog OR human homolog of mouse double minute 2 OR HDM2 OR murine double minute 2) AND (breast cancer OR breast carcinoma OR breast neoplasm) AND (single nucleotide polymorphism OR SNP OR polymorphism OR variant). Inclusion criteria in this systematic review were as follows: (a) original studies investigated the MDM2 gene variations by the experimental methods for genotyping of the patients with breast cancer, (b) using the blood or tissue of the human samples, and (c) evaluating both case and control groups. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (a) cell line surveys; (b) studies that did not report the association of SNP status at least with one of the BC risk, IHC/outcome, or onset age variables; (c) review and meta‐analysis papers; (d) lack of reporting the frequency of each genotype; (e) papers that had the full text in a non‐English language; (f) the conference, letter, note, and editorial papers; and (g) history of cancer in the individuals of control groups (Figure 1). Full text of the eligible papers was checked. Information on the studied variation, country, geographic area of the population, ethnicity, sample size, main case background, matching in case‐control studies, source of samples, and the associated risk with BC, IHC/outcome and onset age was obtained from the selected papers. In some included studies, the corresponding author or co‐authors were contacted (email) to complete the study information.
Figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram of article selection for systematic review on the MDM2 variations in breast cancer patients

PRISMA flow diagram of article selection for systematic review on the MDM2 variations in breast cancer patients

RESULTS

Population specifications

Among the patients, there were 98 females and 2 males. A family history (breast cancer) was detected among 7.4% of the patients. Among 94 patients with the recorded breast cancer history in the first‐degree relative, 80.4% of them were positive. Also, the frequency of IHC markers including ER+, PgR+, and P53+ was equal to 69.4%, 62.4%, and 48.6%, respectively. Patients were classified into four groups of Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2‐enriched, and Basal‐like based on the tumor markers with the values of 14.6%, 54.9%, 24.4%, and 6.1%, respectively. These molecular subclasses were classified according to the presentations provided in the IMPAKT Breast Cancer Conference in Brussels, Belgium, on May 2012.

Bioinformatics analysis

In the rSNPBase database, SNP309 and del1518 polymorphisms were introduced as rSNPs, and the presence of TF binding region as the related regulatory element was confirmed. The performed analysis by the VEP tool indicated the rs2279744 as a risk factor in the ClinVar database, and a high score was reported for rs3730485 in the transcript support level. SNP Function Prediction and TFBIND tools confirmed a new site region for the SNP309G allele and del allele in del1518. The CpG island predictions of two polymorphisms were checked in the MethPrimer 2.0 tool, and the results indicated that the rs2279744 is located in the CpG island region.

SNP309 and Del1518 frequencies in the control and breast cancer groups

Figure 2 shows the electrophoresis pattern of the RFLP fragments of MDM2‐SNP309 and amplified products of MDM2‐del1518. The frequencies of SNP309 genotypes were as follows: TT (23%), TG (52%), and GG (25%) among the patients, and they were obtained as follows: TT (23%), TG (52%), and GG (25%) in the controls (P‐value = .118). Also, the rate of del1518 genotypes in the patient group was as follows: ins/ins (52%), ins/del (41%), and del/del (7%), and they were obtained as follows: ins/ins (62%), ins/del (30%), and del/del (8%) in the control group (P‐value = .266). The frequencies of SNP309 and del1518 genotypes were evaluated among all the individuals in the two study groups using the Hardy‐Weinberg equilibrium by the available software, and the results showed no significant deviation (P‐values > .05). Frequency distribution of MDM2 SNP309 and del1518 genotypes was analyzed in the patients and control subjects, and the results indicated no positive difference in the genotype frequencies of the co‐dominant, dominant, recessive, and over‐dominant models between the two study groups. Also, no significant difference was found for MDM2 SNP309 and del1518 allele frequencies between the patients and controls. However, in SNP309 polymorphism, the GG genotype in the recessive model was positively different among the patients and controls (P = .048, OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.30‐1.00) indicating its protective role against the breast cancer. Then, genotyping results were confirmed by the DNA sequencing. Figure 3 shows the results obtained from each genotype for SNP309 and homozygous genotypes for del1518. Haplotype study of MDM2 gene polymorphisms showed a strong linkage disequilibrium between the SNP309 and del1518 variants (D' = 0.9995) in our studied population.
Figure 2

Gel (agarose) electrophoresis of PCR products for del1518 and PCR‐RFLP for SNP309 of the MDM2 gene. (A) Lane 1 shows del/del genotype; lanes 2, 4, 5, and 6 show ins/ins genotypes; and lane 3 shows ins/del genotype. (B) Lanes 1 and 2 show TG genotypes, and lanes 3 and 4 demonstrate GG and TT genotypes, respectively. Lane 7 in (A) and lane 5 in (B) show 100 bp DNA ladder. The map showed the 100‐bp upstream and downstream of the SNP309

Figure 3

Sequencing results of SNP309 and del1518 in case patients. 1. SNP309 positions were marked with the arrows for TT (1.A), TG (1.B), and GG (1.C) genotypes. 2. The sequence of 40‐bp del1518 was showed in the box in ins/ins genotype (2.A). The Figure 2.B shows the del/del genotype of 40‐bp del1518. Sequencing results were viewed in Chromas (Version 2.6.6)

Gel (agarose) electrophoresis of PCR products for del1518 and PCR‐RFLP for SNP309 of the MDM2 gene. (A) Lane 1 shows del/del genotype; lanes 2, 4, 5, and 6 show ins/ins genotypes; and lane 3 shows ins/del genotype. (B) Lanes 1 and 2 show TG genotypes, and lanes 3 and 4 demonstrate GG and TT genotypes, respectively. Lane 7 in (A) and lane 5 in (B) show 100 bp DNA ladder. The map showed the 100‐bp upstream and downstream of the SNP309 Sequencing results of SNP309 and del1518 in case patients. 1. SNP309 positions were marked with the arrows for TT (1.A), TG (1.B), and GG (1.C) genotypes. 2. The sequence of 40‐bp del1518 was showed in the box in ins/ins genotype (2.A). The Figure 2.B shows the del/del genotype of 40‐bp del1518. Sequencing results were viewed in Chromas (Version 2.6.6)

Polymorphisms, clinicopathological features and demographic factors

The possible association between the clinicopathological features of the patients with SNP309 and del1518 genotypes was analyzed in the co‐dominant, dominant, recessive, and over‐dominant models. Our results indicated a significant association between the MDM2‐SNP309 genotypes in an over‐dominant model with HER2 and p53 status and also in a recessive model with the family history of other types of cancer (Table 1). Also, the association of the SNP309 and del1518 genotypes of the MDM2 gene with the age onset of the disease was evaluated in the patients with breast cancer. Our results demonstrated no significant association between the genotypes of the SNP309 and del1518 and onset age of disease (Data not shown).
Table 1

Association of SNP309 with HER2, P53, and family history of other cancers’ characteristics in breast cancer patients

VariableSNP309SNP309
TGTT + GG P‐value*2)GGTT + TG P‐value*2)
Family history of other types of cancer cancer
No4331.142 (2.155)1361.049 (3.869)
Yes711711
P53
Positive2312.018 (5.595)728.152 (2.054)
Negative14231324
HER2
Positive2514.031 (4.677)831.268 (1.226)
Negative15231226

P‐values were calculated with the chi‐square test.

Association of SNP309 with HER2, P53, and family history of other cancers’ characteristics in breast cancer patients P‐values were calculated with the chi‐square test.

DISCUSSION

The MDM2 gene is located on the chromosome 12 q14.3‐q15.1. The MDM2 gene (HDM2) is transcribed through two promoters: basic promoter (p1) and alternative promoter (p2). , , , Some functional and regulatory sequences in the promoter regions of the MDM2 (rSNP) can change the gene expression level. , It has been indicated that the rSNPs of the genes associated with DNA damage and apoptosis mechanisms can influence the individual's sensitivity to the cancer progression. Several types of research have studied the SNPs in the MDM2 gene and their association with the risk of breast cancer in different populations. Common studied polymorphisms are located in the first intron of the MDM2 gene as P2 promoter. The SNP309T>G (rs2279744) is located at position 309 (IVS1 + 309) in the P2 region so that T to G transversion enhances the binding affinity of specificity protein 1 (Sp1) to a specific sequence in the promoter and, thus, increases the transcriptional level of the MDM2 gene. , , Rs3730485 (GRCh38.p7 assembly), also known as del1518 polymorphism (merged into rs150550023 in GRCh38.p12 assembly), is located in the P1 region of the MDM2 gene having a putative TATA motif. In the del1518 polymorphism, del‐allele can increase the binding of some transcription factors, such as Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2A (MEF2A), RAR‐Related Orphan Receptor A (RORA), and MBD2‐Interacting Zinc Finger protein (MIZF) to the regulatory sequence in the promoter regions. The del1518 has high linkage disequilibrium (LD) with SNP309 locus. , High‐level expression of MDM2 can influence the p53 signaling pathway allowing the damaged cells to escape from the control point of the cell cycle leading to the increase in the carcinogenesis. , , , Risk of BC is influenced by the environmental, hormonal, and genetic factors. , , The MDM2 protein is a main negative regulator in controlling the p53 expression. It has been found that the MDM2 protein binds to the p53 and induces the ubiquitination and therefore degradation of the p53 by proteasome. Therefore, high‐level expression of the MDM2 gene contributes to the reduced p53 activity and results in escaping from the checkpoints in the cell cycle. , , The P53, as a tumor suppressor protein, activates the cellular processes, such as halt of the cell cycle, autophagy, and apoptosis process in response to the genotoxic stresses and damages. , , Studies have shown that the genotypes of SNP309GG and del/del in 40‐bp ins/del polymorphisms in the MDM2 gene could influence its expression and may play a significant role in the cancer susceptibility. The association of MDM2‐SNP309 and del1518 with different types of cancer has been investigated in relation to the breast, , esophageal, , uterine leiomyomas, endometrial, bladder, lung, and colorectal cancers ; however, the reported results were contradictory. There are no available reports related to the T309G and del1518 of the MDM2 gene among the Iranian population in the west of Iran; therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the relationship between these MDM2 polymorphisms with the breast cancer for the first time. Our results showed a negative association between the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism and development of the breast cancer. Limited studies have been done with the contradictory results on the correlation of MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism and BC. , , , Consistent with our results, Ma et al found no correlation between the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism and BC in the Chinese population. Gansmo et al (2016) in a meta‐analysis concluded that the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism was not associated with the BC. Also, Hua et al (2017) performed a meta‐analysis study to investigate the role of MDM2 del1518 polymorphism associated with the cancer susceptibility. Their results provided a significant support for the lack of association between the MDM2 del1518 polymorphism and cancer risk. In other studies conducted in the Chinese population, no association has been reported between the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and uterine leiomyomas. , However, inconsistent with the results of our study, Hashemi et al (2014) revealed an association between the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism with the risk of BC in the Zahedan population, Sistan and Baluchestan province (southeast of Iran). Also, a significant correlation has been observed between the MDM2‐del1518 polymorphism and the BC in the Mexican population. Contradictory results in the reported studies can be due to the differences in the sample size and ethnicity of the populations. It is suggested that the 40‐bp ins/del in the promoter of the MDM2 might not play a major role in the risk of BC. Herein, no positive association was found between the frequencies of MDM2‐SNP309 alleles with the risk of BC. Consistent with our results, Hosein Pour et al and Tavakkol Afshari et al reported no positive association between the SNP309 with the BC across populations of the northwest and northeast of Iran. Different studies in the various populations failed to confirm a significant association between the MDM2‐SNP309 and an increased risk of BC. , , , , , , , Also, Zhao et al (2012) in a meta‐analysis reported no significant correlation between the MDM2‐SNP309 and the incidence of BC in the European populations. A negative association has been confirmed between the MDM2‐SNP309 and other types of cancer, such as endometrial, bladder, esophageal squamous cell, Kaposi's sarcoma, and uterine leiomyomas. However, in several studies, an association has been reported between the SNP309 polymorphism and the incidence of BC worldwide. , , , , , , , Our results indicated a protective role of the GG genotype in SNP309 against the BC (P = .048, OR = 0.54, 95%CI = 0.30‐1.00). Consistent with our findings, some studies have revealed the protective role of GG genotype of MDM2‐SNP309 in different cancers including the lung, colorectal, and esophageal cancers. Protective role of GG genotype in MDM2‐SNP309 may be due to the formation of haplotypes with other unknown effective rSNPs. It can reduce the positive effect of SNP309 and highly influences the expression level of the MDM2 gene and decreases it. The strong linkage disequilibrium was observed between the SNP309 and del1518 variants in the studied population. In fact, when the alleles are in the linkage disequilibrium condition, haplotypes do not occur with the expected frequencies. It can be used to improve the power of the cancer‐genetic association studies, and it helps to detect the true associations in the case‐control studies. So, the LD results suggested the homogeneity of these polymorphisms in the Kurdish population. The contradictory results for the function of MDM2‐SNP309 in different types of cancer may be due to several reasons: (a) The effect of this variant is related to the changes in the binding of tissue specific‐transcription factors (TF) in the promoter ; (b) malignancies in various tissues can have different molecular mechanisms, and even in one type of cancer because of heterogeneity across different individuals ; (c) the different sample size of the studied populations ; (d) differences in the ethnicity and lifestyle‐related factors in various studied populations may influence the effect of MDM2‐SNP309 on the incidence of BC , ; (e) function and expression level of the MDM2 gene or TFs‐associated genes may be related to the DNA methylation as a main epigenetic mechanism so that the methylation status of the regulatory sequence in the promoter is different in various populations based on the specific environmental and ethnic conditions , ; (f) polymorphism effect can be related to the interaction with the haplotypes and other SNPs in the MDM2 gene ; and also (g) variable of minor allele frequency (MAF) can show up in the demographic layers of the populations, and as a result, the risk of BC may change with respect to the ethnicity because of their allele frequencies. Some diseases, such as cancer, are complex, meaning that they are caused by the multiple genes and environmental factors. Studying a few genetic polymorphisms in such small populations is like only a piece of the large puzzle presenting their ability to influence the cancer risk in different populations, especially ethnicities. Also, it can provide an overall perspective for the subsequent studies on the genes involved in the desired pathway in the ethnic groups. In the next step, our research was expanded with a systematic review of all the variations of the studied MDM2 gene in the patients with breast cancer for the first time. There were several case‐control studies on assessment of the functional variations of the MDM2 and the susceptibility to BC. As indicated in Table 2, seven single nucleotide variations (SNVs) and an ins/del were investigated in the eligible reviewed studies. Commonly studied polymorphisms are located in the first intron (Intron 1‐2) as P2 promoter of MDM2 gene.
Table 2

Properties of included studied polymorphisms in the systematic review

RsIDNamePolymorphismRisk allele * , a Position b Consequence in MDM2 Main TF‐related SNPFrequency of minor allele c
Rs150550023 d Del151840‐bp ins/delDeletionchr12:68806996‐688070652KB UpstreamRORA, MEF2A, MIZF0.37 e
Rs2870820SNP55C → TTchr12:68808546Intron 1‐2Sp10.23
Rs117039649SNP285G → CCchr12:68808776Intron 1‐2Sp10.01
Rs2279744SNP309, G2580TT → GGchr12:68808800Intron 1‐2Sp10.36
Rs1196333SNP344T → AAchr12:68808835Intron 1‐2TFAP2A0.04
NDSNP443G → TTchr12:68808934Intron 1‐2NRNR
Rs769412SNP354A → GGchr12:68839435Exon 11 f NR0.07
Rs937283G2164AA → GGchr12:688083845 Prime UTRNR0.30

Minor alleles were considered as the risk allele.

Based on GRCh38.p12 assembly.

1000 genome.

Rs3730485 based on GRCh38.p7 assembly.

Based on the frequency of GenomAD.

Synonymous mutation.

Properties of included studied polymorphisms in the systematic review Minor alleles were considered as the risk allele. Based on GRCh38.p12 assembly. 1000 genome. Rs3730485 based on GRCh38.p7 assembly. Based on the frequency of GenomAD. Synonymous mutation. Totally, 46 studies on the SNVs and one ins/del reported in 36 papers and the current research had the eligibility to be included in the systematic review (Figure 4). The status of eight variants in the patients with BC was included in the populations from 23 countries in the systematic review. Table 3 shows the characteristics of the eligible studies.
Figure 4

The positions of the all assessed MDM2 variations in the current systematic review on breast cancer patients

Table 3

All investigated MDM2 variations in the case‐control studies on the BC patients

rs# (variation name)Country (population1)EthnicitySample sourceNo. of case/controlPatientsControl groupGenotyping method(s)Association withReferences
TypeGenderMatch with BCPropertiesRisk2 IHC & outcome3 Age of onset4
rs3730485 (del1518)China (Nanjing And Southeast)Chinese, Unrelated Ethnic HanBlood366/605BCFemaleAge, genderCancer‐freePCRNot significantNRNegative 1
Iran (Kermanshah Province, West)KurdishBlood100/100BC98 Females, 2 MalesAge, Area Of ResidenceHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCRNot SignificantNegativeNegative Present Study
Iran (Southeast)NRBlood236/203BCNRAgeCancer‐FreePCRHigher RiskNegativeNegative 72
Mexico (Guadalajara City)NRBlood742/345BCFemaleGender, Area Of ResidenceHealthyPCRHigher RiskNRNR 73
Norway (CONOR) StudyNRBlood1717/1872BCFemaleAge, Gender, Area Of Residence, Same CohortHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCRNot SignificantNRNR 74
rs2870820 (SNP55)Norway (CONOR) StudyNRBlood1707/1858BCFemaleAge, Gender, Same CohortHealthyLightSNiPNot SignificantNRNegative 75
rs117039649 (SNP285)AustriaAustrianBlood406/254BCFemaleGender, Geographybenign gynecological lesion/HealthyReal‐Time PCRNot SignificantNegativeNegative 76
Mixed (Norway And Netherlands)Mixed (Norwegian And Dutch)Blood & Cancerious Breast Tissue1973/2518

1. BC

2. BC, ER+

NRSame CountriesHealthySequencingNRNR

1. NR

2. Negative

77
Norway (CONOR) StudyNRBlood1717/1872BCFemaleAge, Gender, Area Of Residence, Same CohortHealthyLightSnipNot SignificantNRNR 78
Poland (Wielkopolska)CaucasianBlood468/550BCFemaleGender, Geography, EthnicityHealthySequencingLower RiskNegativeNR 79
Scotland

Scottish

Caucasian

Blood299/275BCFemaleGender, Geography, EthnicityCancer‐FreeSequencingNRNRNegative 80
rs2279744 (SNP309)AustriaAustrianBlood406/254BCFemaleGender, GeographyBenign gynecological lesion/HealthyReal‐Time PCRNot SignificantP53, Ki67Positive 76
BrazilNRBlood/ Non‐Tumoral Tissue39/186BC, R337H Mutation CarriersNRNRCancer‐Free, No Family History Of Cancer, Without The R337H MutationReal‐Time PCRNRNegativeNR 81
CanadaCaucasianBlood38/379BC, Pre‐MenopasualFemaleNRNRSequencingNot SignificantNRNR 82
China (Shanghai)NRBlood

1. 402/84

2. 402/605

BCFemale

1. Gender, Geography

2. Gender

Healthy, Cancer‐FreeSequencing

1. Higher Risk

2. Higher Risk

NegativePositive 83
China (Nanjing And Southeast)Chinese, Unrelated Ethnic HanBlood366/605BCFemaleAge, GenderCancer‐FreePIRA‐PCR, SequencingNot SignificantNRNegative 71
Czech RepublicNRTissue/ Blood158/149BCNRNRMixed Of Healthy And Ischemic Disease (Cancer‐Free)PCR‐RFLPNot SignificantNegativeNegative 84
England (WCGS)NRNR59/102BC/ With BRCA1 MutationsFemaleNRNRPyrosequencingNRNRNegative 85
England (Anglo‐Saxon Population)BritishNR351/258BCFemaleGender, GeographyCancer‐FreeAllele Specific PCRNot SignificantNRNegative 86
GermanNRBlood549/1065Familial BC, Lacking BRCA1&2 MutationsFemaleEthnicityHealthyReal‐Time PCR, SequencingNot SignificantNRNegative 87
India (North)NRBlood100/100BC, IDCNRAgeHealthy, Cancer‐FreeAllele Specific PCRNot SignificantHER2, Distant MetastasisNR 88
India (Lucknow, North)NRBlood104/105BCFemaleGender, Geography, EthnicityTumor/Cancer‐FreeARMS‐PCRNot SignificantNRNR 89
Iran (Kermanshah Province, West)KurdishBlood100/100BC98 Females, 2 MalesAge, Area of residenceHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCRLower RiskHER2, P53, Family history of cancerNegative Present Study
Iran (Mashhad City, Southeast)NRBlood128/126BCFemaleAge, GenderHealthyARMS‐PCRNot Significant5 NegativePositive 90
IsraelAshkenazi–Jewish (AJ) OriginNR187/138BC, BRCA1/2 Mutation Non‐CarrierFemaleGenderCancer‐FreeMALDI‐TOFNot SignificantNRNegative 91
KSAArabianBlood100/100BCFemaleGender, EthnicityHealthyReal‐Time PCRHigher RiskNegativeNegative 92
KyrgyzstanKyrgyzBlood117/102BCFemaleAge, GenderBC‐FreePCR‐RFLPNot SignificantNRNR 93
Mixed (Norway And Netherlands)Mixed (Norwegian And Dutch)Blood & Cancerious Breast Tissue1973/2518

1. BC

2. BC, ER+

NRSame CountriesHealthySequencingNot SignificantNR

1. NR

2. Negative

77
Mixed (UK)Scottish CaucasianBlood299/182BCFemaleGender, Geography, EthnicityCancer‐FreeSequencingNot SignificantTumour Grade, Lymph Node, NPINegative 80
Netherlands (South–West)NRBlood343/126Familial BC340 Females, 3 MalesGeographyHeterozygous carriers of cystic fibrosis gene mutationsSequencingNot SignificantNRPositive 94
Norway (CONOR) StudyNRBlood1717/1872BCFemaleAge, Gender, Area Of Residence, Same CohortHealthyLightsnipNot SignificantNRNR 78
Poland (Wielkopolska)CaucasianBlood468/550BCFemaleGender, Geographically, EthnicityHealthyPCR‐RFLP, SequencingNot SignificantNegativeNR 79
Sweden (South‐East Sweden Health Care Region)NRBlood/ Normal Lymph Node Tissues123/146BC, Young WomenFemaleGender, GeographyHealthyPyrosequencingNot SignificantNegativeNR 95
TaiwanAsian Taiwanese, Not Immigrants From America Or Europe.Blood255/324BC254 Females, 1 MaleHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCR‐RFLP, SequencingHigher RiskNRNR 96
TaiwanTaiwanesBlood124/97Sporadic BCFemaleGender, EthnicityHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCR‐RFLP, SequencingHigher RiskNRPositive 97
TurkeyNRBlood110/138BCFemaleAge, GenderHealthyPCR‐RFLPHigher RiskNegativeNR 98
TurkeyNRBlood147/120Familial BCFemaleGenderHealthyPCR‐RFLPHigher RiskNRNR 99
TurkeyTurkishBlood223/149BC (Ductal Carcinoma)FemaleAge, Gender, EthnicityHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCR‐RFLPNot SignificantNRNR 100
US (NHS Study)NRBlood1519/2271BCFemaleAge, Menopausal Status, Recent Postmenopausal Hormone (PMH) useHealthyPCR‐RFLPNot SignificantNRNR 101
US (Baltimore)

1. African American Descent

2. Caucasian White Descent (Not Hispanic White)

Blood & Cancerious & Noncancerious Breast Tissue

1. 165/178

2. 125/136

BCFemaleAge, Gender, Geography, RaceCancer‐FreeReal‐Time PCRNot SignificantTumor P53 ExpressionNegative 102
US (Carolina Breast Cancer Study)

1. African‐Americans

2. Whites

Blood

1. 767/680

2. 1270/1133

BCFemaleNRNRReal‐Time PcrNot SignificantER, PgRNegative 103
rs1196333 (SNP344)Mixed (Norway And Netherlands)Mixed (Norwegian And DutchBlood1271/2954BCFemaleNRHealthySequencingNot SignificantNRNegative 104
ScotlandScottish CaucasianBlood299/275BCFemaleGeography, EthnicityCancer‐FreeSequencingNot SignificantNRNegative 80
rs769412 (SNP354)US (Baltimore City)

1. African American Descent

2. Caucasian White Descent (Not Hispanic White)

Blood & Cancerious & Noncancerious Tissue

1. 166/176

2. 127/134

BCFemaleAge, Gender, RaceBC‐FreeReal‐Time PCR

1. Higher Risk

2. Not Significant

NRNegative 102
(SNP443)ScotlandScottish CaucasianBlood299/275BCFemaleGeography, EthnicityCancer‐FreeSequencingNot SignificantNRNegative 80
rs937283China (Central Chinese Population)NRBlood480/500BCFemaleAge, Gender, Smoking Status, Drinking StatusHealthy, Cancer‐FreePCR‐RFLP, SequencingHigher RiskNRNR 105

1. Region of the hospital‐based studies was not reported. 2. Combined effect with other SNPs and classified groups (based on demographic characteristics and clinical features) were not reported. 3. Association between IHC reports and clinical/outcome features with distribution of alleles and genotypes in BC patients. 4. Association with age of incidence in breast cancer patients was considered for each variation alone, and it was not reported in cases of haplotypes or in the subgroup of other variants. Also, age similarity was not included. 5. According to the stated result in the article, no significant association is reported (P = .048).

Abbreviations: ARMS, Amplification Refractory Mutation System; BC, Breast Cancer; CONOR, Cohort of Norway; ER, Estrogen Receptor; IDC, Invasive Ductal Carcinoma; IHC, Immunohistochemistry; MALDI‐TOF, Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization‐Time of Flight; NPI, Nottingham Prognostic Index; NR, Not Reported; PgR, Progesterone Receptor; PIRA, Primer‐Introduced Restriction Analysis; RFLP, Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism; WCGS, Wessex Clinical Genetics Service.

The positions of the all assessed MDM2 variations in the current systematic review on breast cancer patients All investigated MDM2 variations in the case‐control studies on the BC patients 1. BC 2. BC, ER+ 1. NR 2. Negative Scottish Caucasian 1. 402/84 2. 402/605 1. Gender, Geography 2. Gender 1. Higher Risk 2. Higher Risk 1. BC 2. BC, ER+ 1. NR 2. Negative 1. African American Descent 2. Caucasian White Descent (Not Hispanic White) 1. 165/178 2. 125/136 1. African‐Americans 2. Whites 1. 767/680 2. 1270/1133 1. African American Descent 2. Caucasian White Descent (Not Hispanic White) 1. 166/176 2. 127/134 1. Higher Risk 2. Not Significant 1. Region of the hospital‐based studies was not reported. 2. Combined effect with other SNPs and classified groups (based on demographic characteristics and clinical features) were not reported. 3. Association between IHC reports and clinical/outcome features with distribution of alleles and genotypes in BC patients. 4. Association with age of incidence in breast cancer patients was considered for each variation alone, and it was not reported in cases of haplotypes or in the subgroup of other variants. Also, age similarity was not included. 5. According to the stated result in the article, no significant association is reported (P = .048). Abbreviations: ARMS, Amplification Refractory Mutation System; BC, Breast Cancer; CONOR, Cohort of Norway; ER, Estrogen Receptor; IDC, Invasive Ductal Carcinoma; IHC, Immunohistochemistry; MALDI‐TOF, Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization‐Time of Flight; NPI, Nottingham Prognostic Index; NR, Not Reported; PgR, Progesterone Receptor; PIRA, Primer‐Introduced Restriction Analysis; RFLP, Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism; WCGS, Wessex Clinical Genetics Service. As demonstrated in Table 3, the main sample sources in the reviewed studies were taken from the blood. Two studies , have used the samples including the cancerous tissue for evaluation of two variations in MDM2 gene that may change the genotype frequency of the target polymorphisms and influence the association of SNP with the studied outcome and, therefore, intervening in the interpretation of the results. Most studies have been conducted on the female patients with BC. In most studies, the control groups were matched with the patients in terms of age, sex, and geographical location parameters. BC‐free and healthy individuals were mostly considered as the control group. Also, rs2279744 known as SNP309 and G2580T was the well‐studied SNP in the MDM2 gene. This polymorphism occurs as a result of T to G transversion that has a higher affinity to the transcription factor of Sp1 in its mutant allele. Our review revealed that there are contradictory results for this SNP. Six studies conducted in Asia have confirmed the positive result of this polymorphism in increasing the BC incidence. In overall, in accordance with our case‐control research, studies conducted worldwide until 2019 have shown that this SNP did not increase the BC risk. Also, a recent meta‐analysis performed in 2018 showed that this polymorphism could not have a significant intervention in the carcinogenesis of BC. Results of some studies on the correlation between the SNP309 with onset age of disease indicated no positive association in this regard. , , SNP285(G>C) is located in intron1‐2 and the upstream of the SNP309 (Figure 4). Some studies have demonstrated that the C allele plays a role as an antagonist factor for SNP309 and reduces the Sp1 affinity for binding to the gene promoter and decreases the transcription activity. , In the literature review, reported results did not confirm the role of SNP285 as a risk factor for BC susceptibility. Rs3730485 (GRCh38.p7 genome assembly), known as del1518, is located in the promoter region of the 2kb upstream. Deletion allele can make a higher potential binding site for the RORA, MEF2A,and MIZF TFs. This 40‐bp ins/del is located near the 40‐bp ins/del (rs150550023) so that, in the GRCh38.p12 genome assembly, these polymorphisms are merged into rs150550023 with three alleles: 40‐bp double insertion, 40‐bp insertion, and 40‐bp deletion. The current review revealed controversial results regarding the lack of significant association and positive correlation for an increasing role of del1518 on the BC susceptibility in different populations. Limited number of studies have been conducted on the relationship between the SNP55, SNP344, , SNP354, SNP443, and rs937285 with the risk of BC. SNP443 does not have the RefSeq ID and is not validated as a variation in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) and Ensemble databases. SNP55 and Rs1196333 have a higher affinity to bind to the Sp1 and TFAP2A TFs in the mutant allele, respectively, leading to the increase in the expression level of MDM2 in the cell. In conclusion, our results indicated that the GG genotype of SNP309‐MDM2 plays a protective role in the BC in our studied population. However, our findings indicated no positive association between the MDM2 del1518 polymorphism and the risk of BC in the Kurdish population from western Iran. Also, our systematic review indicated that the SNP309, SNP285, and del1518 polymorphisms of MDM2 gene in different populations mostly were not associated with the BC risk. Thus, there is a need to evaluate other novel rSNPs in the MDM2 gene in the future researches as well as the expression of the MDM2 gene and its associated transcription factors, such as RORA, Sp1, MEF2A, and MIZF. There were some limitations in the present study including a small number of included studies with the contradictory results for 40‐bp del1518 polymorphism to calculate the sample size, obtaining the patients̕ consent to participate in the study, achieving a maximum number of the included new cases, time constraint, and obtaining a maximum data from the patients' medical history in new cases. Therefore, more time should be taken to collect the sample of new cases, increase the sample size, and obtain the complete IHC characteristics of the patients for the future studies.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

AJ collected the samples, performed experiments, extracted the systematic review data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. KY and MA designed the case‐control and systematic review studies and analyzed the data. ZR and IS edited the final version of the manuscript. PM draw the schematic figure. All authors reviewed the final version of the manuscript and approved it for publication.

ETHICAL APPROVAL

Ethics Committee in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Iran, approves the current study. All control and patient's individuals agreed to participant in the study and signed the form of informed consent (Helsinki II declaration).
  75 in total

1.  No association between the MDM2 -309 T/G promoter polymorphism and breast cancer in African-Americans or Whites.

Authors:  Robert C Millikan; Kimberley Heard; Scott Winkel; Edgar J Hill; Kristin Heard; Beri Massa; Lydia Mayes; Patricia Williams; Rachel Holston; Kathleen Conway; Sharon Edmiston; Allan René de Cotret
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  The significance of MDM2 SNP309 and p53 Arg72Pro in young women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Anna Lång; Pia Palmebäck Wegman; Sten Wingren
Journal:  Oncol Rep       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.906

3.  Influence of MDM2 SNP309 and SNP285 status on the risk of cancer in the breast, prostate, lung and colon.

Authors:  Liv B Gansmo; Stian Knappskog; Pål Romundstad; Kristian Hveem; Lars Vatten; Per E Lønning
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 7.396

Review 4.  The MDM2 gene family.

Authors:  Michael Mendoza; Garni Mandani; Jamil Momand
Journal:  Biomol Concepts       Date:  2014-03

5.  Involvement of p53 R72P polymorphism in the association of MDM2-SNP309 with breast cancer.

Authors:  Jyh-Der Leu; Chung-Yih Wang; Han-Yi Tsai; I-Feng Lin; Ran-Chou Chen; Yi-Jang Lee
Journal:  Oncol Rep       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 3.906

6.  Effects of estrogen on breast cancer development: Role of estrogen receptor independent mechanisms.

Authors:  Wei Yue; Ji-Ping Wang; Yuebai Li; Ping Fan; Guijian Liu; Nan Zhang; Mark Conaway; Hongkun Wang; Kenneth S Korach; Wayne Bocchinfuso; Richard Santen
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Polymorphisms in TP53 and MDM2 combined are associated with high grade endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Katie A Ashton; Anthony Proietto; Geoffrey Otton; Ian Symonds; Mark McEvoy; John Attia; Michael Gilbert; Ute Hamann; Rodney J Scott
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Associations between the MDM2 promoter P1 polymorphism del1518 (rs3730485) and incidence of cancer of the breast, lung, colon and prostate.

Authors:  Liv B Gansmo; Lars Vatten; Pål Romundstad; Kristian Hveem; Bríd M Ryan; Curtis C Harris; Stian Knappskog; Per E Lønning
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-05-10

9.  MDM2 promoter SNP55 (rs2870820) affects risk of colon cancer but not breast-, lung-, or prostate cancer.

Authors:  Reham Helwa; Liv B Gansmo; Pål Romundstad; Kristian Hveem; Lars Vatten; Bríd M Ryan; Curtis C Harris; Per E Lønning; Stian Knappskog
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Association of rs2279744 and rs117039649 promoter polymorphism with the risk of gynecological cancer: A meta-analysis of case-control studies.

Authors:  Jianxin Zhang; Yang Zhang; Zhenyu Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.889

View more
  2 in total

1.  Impact on breast cancer susceptibility and clinicopathological traits of common genetic polymorphisms in TP53, MDM2 and ATM genes in Sardinian women.

Authors:  Matteo Floris; Giovanna Pira; Paolo Castiglia; Maria Laura Idda; Maristella Steri; Maria Rosaria De Miglio; Andrea Piana; Andrea Cossu; Antonio Azara; Caterina Arru; Giovanna Deiana; Carlo Putzu; Valeria Sanna; Ciriaco Carru; Antonello Serra; Marco Bisail; Maria Rosaria Muroni
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.111

2.  A case-control study on the SNP309T → G and 40-bp Del1518 of the MDM2 gene and a systematic review for MDM2 polymorphisms in the patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Amin Jalilvand; Kheirollah Yari; Mozaffar Aznab; Zohreh Rahimi; Iman Salahshouri Far; Pantea Mohammadi
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2020-09-20       Impact factor: 3.124

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.