| Literature DB >> 33109108 |
Zumurelaiti Ainiwaer1, Reyilanmu Maisaidi1, Jing Liu1, Lili Han2, Sulaiya Husaiyin1, Jing Lu1, Mayinuer Niyazi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: PGF and TNFAIP2 are important angiogenic factors, which were abnormal expression in cervical cancer (CC). However, there is currently no report investigating the relationship of PGF and TNFAIP2 gene polymorphisms to CC risk.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical cancer; PGF; Polymorphism; TNFAIP2
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33109108 PMCID: PMC7590450 DOI: 10.1186/s12881-020-01144-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Genet ISSN: 1471-2350 Impact factor: 2.103
Characteristics of patients with cervical cancer and controls
| Characteristics | Cases | Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD (years) | 43.27 ± 11.78 | 43.46 ± 13.03 | 0.832 |
| > 43 | 176 (51.5%) | 263 (52.8%) | |
| ≤ 43 | 166 (48.5%) | 235 (47.2%) | |
| Negative | 51 (14.9%) | ||
| Positive | 195 (57.0%) | ||
| Missing | 96 (28.1%) | ||
| I-II | 132 (38.6%) | ||
| III-IV | 80 (23.4%) | ||
| Missing | 130 (38.0%) | ||
Relationships between the candidate SNPs and cervical cancer risk
| Gene | Model | Genotype | Case | Control | Adjusted by age and gender | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95%CI) | ||||||
PGF rs8019391 | Genotype | CC | 208 | 327 | 1.00 | |
| CT | 119 | 145 | 1.29 (0.96–1.74) | 0.093 | ||
| TT | 15 | 26 | 0.91 (0.47–1.76) | 0.777 | ||
| Dominant | CC | 208 | 327 | 1.00 | 0.150 | |
| CT-TT | 134 | 171 | 1.23 (0.93–1.64) | |||
| Recessive | CC-CT | 327 | 472 | 1.00 | 0.585 | |
| TT | 15 | 26 | 0.83 (0.43–1.6) | |||
| Log-additive | – | – | – | 1.13 (0.89–1.42) | 0.324 | |
PGF rs2268615 | Genotype | CC | 160 | 273 | 1.00 | |
| CA | 156 | 191 | ||||
| AA | 26 | 31 | 1.43 (0.82–2.49) | 0.209 | ||
| Dominant | CC | 160 | 273 | 1.00 | ||
| CA-AA | 182 | 222 | ||||
| Recessive | CC-CA | 316 | 464 | 1.00 | 0.453 | |
| AA | 26 | 31 | 1.23 (0.72–2.11) | |||
| Log-additive | – | – | – | |||
TNFAIP2 rs710100 | Genotype | GG | 118 | 210 | 1.00 | |
| GA | 171 | 211 | ||||
| AA | 53 | 69 | 1.37 (0.89–2.08) | 0.150 | ||
| Dominant | GG | 118 | 210 | 1.00 | ||
| GA-AA | 224 | 280 | ||||
| Recessive | GG-GA | 289 | 421 | 1.00 | 0.576 | |
| AA | 53 | 69 | 1.12 (0.76–1.65) | |||
| Log-additive | – | – | – | |||
SNP single nucleotide polymorphism, OR odds ratio; 95% CI 95% confidence interval
p values were calculated by logistic regression analysis with adjustments for age and gender
p < 0.05 means the data is statistically significant
Relationships between the candidate SNPs and cervical cancer risk according to the stratification by age
| SNP ID | Model | Genotype | > 43 years | ≤ 43 years | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | Control | OR (95%CI) | Case | Control | OR (95%CI) | |||||
PGF rs2268615 | Allele | C | 253 | 393 | 1.00 | 0.303 | 223 | 344 | 1.00 | |
| A | 99 | 131 | 1.17 (0.87–1.59) | 109 | 122 | |||||
| Genotype | CC | 89 | 147 | 1.00 | 71 | 126 | 1.00 | |||
| CA | 75 | 99 | 1.25 (0.84–1.86) | 0.282 | 81 | 92 | ||||
| AA | 12 | 16 | 1.22 (0.55–2.70) | 0.626 | 14 | 15 | 1.62 (0.74–3.56) | 0.228 | ||
| Dominant | CC | 89 | 147 | 1.00 | 0.269 | 71 | 126 | 1.00 | ||
| CA-AA | 87 | 115 | 1.24 (0.85–1.82) | 95 | 107 | |||||
| Recessive | CC-CA | 164 | 246 | 1.00 | 0.795 | 152 | 218 | 1.00 | 0.481 | |
| AA | 12 | 16 | 1.11 (0.51–2.41) | 14 | 15 | 1.31 (0.61–2.81) | ||||
| Log-additive | – | – | – | 1.17 (0.86–1.60) | 0.317 | – | – | |||
TNFAIP2 rs710100 | Allele | G | 217 | 331 | 1.00 | 0.597 | 190 | 300 | 1.00 | |
| A | 135 | 191 | 1.08 (0.82–1.43) | 142 | 158 | |||||
| Genotype | GG | 64 | 111 | 1.00 | 54 | 99 | 1.00 | |||
| GA | 89 | 109 | 1.41 (0.93–2.14) | 0.105 | 82 | 102 | 1.46 (0.94–2.27) | 0.092 | ||
| AA | 23 | 41 | 0.96 (0.53–1.74) | 0.890 | 30 | 28 | ||||
| Dominant | GG | 64 | 111 | 1.00 | 0.208 | 54 | 99 | 1.00 | ||
| GA-AA | 112 | 150 | 1.29 (0.87–1.91) | 112 | 130 | |||||
| Recessive | GG-GA | 153 | 220 | 1.00 | 0.418 | 136 | 201 | 1.00 | 0.103 | |
| AA | 23 | 41 | 0.80 (0.46–1.38) | 30 | 28 | 1.59 (0.91–2.79) | ||||
| Log-additive | – | – | – | 1.07 (0.81–1.41) | 0.635 | – | – | |||
SNP single nucleotide polymorphism, OR odds ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval
p values were calculated by logistic regression analysis with adjustments for age
p < 0.05 indicates statistical significance
Relationship of clinical stage with PGF rs8019391 polymorphism in cervical cancer patients adjusted by age
| SNP ID | Model | Genotype | I-II | III-IV | OR (95%CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs8019391 | Allele | C | 110 | 220 | 1.00 | |
| T | 50 | 44 | ||||
| Codominant | CC | 37 | 91 | 1.00 | ||
| CT | 36 | 38 | ||||
| TT | 7 | 3 | ||||
| Dominant | CC | 37 | 91 | 1.00 | ||
| CT-TT | 43 | 41 | ||||
| Recessive | CC-CT | 73 | 129 | 1.00 | ||
| TT | 7 | 3 | ||||
| Log-additive | – | – | – |
SNP single nucleotide polymorphism, OR odds ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval
p values were calculated by logistic regression analysis with adjustments for age
p < 0.05 indicates statistical significance
Fig. 1Summary of MDR gene-gene interaction. Each cell shows counts of “case” on left and “control” on right
Fig. 2SNP-SNP interaction dendrogram and Fruchterman-Reingold
SNP–SNP interaction models of the PGF and TNFAIP2 genes analyzed by the MDR method
| Model | Training Bal. Acc. | Testing Bal. Acc. | CVC | OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.544 | 0.508 | 6/10 | 1.46 (1.08–1.97) | ||
| 0.564 | 0.536 | 9/10 | 1.91 (1.41–2.59) | ||
| 0.587 | 0.550 | 10/10 | 2.11 (1.56–2.84) |
MDR multifactor dimensionality reduction, Bal. Acc. balanced accuracy, CVC cross–validation consistency, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval
p values were calculated using χ2 tests
p < 0.05 indicates statistical significance