Article

Association of 8q24.21 loci with the risk of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Research Center for Gastroenterology and Liver Disease, Shaheed Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Impact Factor: 3.63). 07/2011; 26(10):1475-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06831.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recent genome-wide association studies of colorectal cancer (CRC) have identified rs6983267 and trs10505477 polymorphisms as key loci in the 8q24 region to be associated with CRC. In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis to determine whether these loci are risk factors for susceptibility to CRC.
We meta-analyzed the 22 included studies (47 003 cases and 45 754 controls) that evaluated the association of rs6983267 and trs10505477 with CRC under alternative genetic models.
A meta-analysis of the pooled data showed allelic and genotypic association of the rs6983267 polymorphism with CRC risk in Asians, Europeans, and European-Americans. A subanalysis of the US studies showed negative results in the studies with non-identified ethnicity of the patients. A meta-analysis of included studies of rs10505477 polymorphisms identified allelic and genotypic associations with CRC risk in the US patients. A further meta-analysis of the US studies demonstrated positive results in the studies with non-identified ethnicity of the samples.
Our data suggested that the rs6983267 G > T polymorphism is a risk factor for CRC in Asians, Europeans, and Americans with European ancestry.

0 Followers
 · 
88 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The rs6983267 at 8q24.21 has been established as a significant cancer-related single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). The risk allele showed similarity to the binding site of transcription factor TCF4/LEF1 that activates transcription of MYC. However, little is known about the role of this SNP in increasing MYC activity in colorectal cancers (CRCs). The genotypes of rs6983267 in peripheral blood and primary cancers, MYC activity and copy number (CN) alteration were examined in 107 CRCs. Next, we plotted the number of cancers cell lines exhibiting specific G/T genotypes in 746 cancer cell lines of the Sanger Institute database. Then we validated the relationship between the 8q24 SNP status and clinicopathologic parameters in 68 CRCs with loss of heterozygosity (LOH). The MYC module activity was activated by either transcription in the risk allele (G) or by amplification in the non-risk allele (T). Then, we confirmed that the CN amplification dominantly occurred in the non-risk allele, whereas CN neutral LOH, which indicated uniparental disomy (UPD) was more frequently observed for the risk allele. Finally, we confirmed that risk allele dominant cases, either by amplification or by UPD, indicated a more malignant clinical phenotype than non-risk allele dominant cases. The development of CRC requires MYC activation through retention of the risk allele, or amplification of the non-risk allele at the oncogenic SNP in the site of primary tumor.
    Annals of Surgical Oncology 01/2014; 21(S4). DOI:10.1245/s10434-013-3468-6 · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The clinical use of genetic variation in the evaluation of cancer risk is expanding, and thus understanding how determinants of cancer susceptibility identified in one population can be applied to another is of growing importance. However there is considerable debate on the relevance of ethnic background in clinical genetics, reflecting both the significance and complexity of genetic heritage. We address this via a systematic review of reported associations with cancer risk for 82 markers in 68 studies across six different cancer types, comparing association results between ethnic groups and examining linkage disequilibrium between risk alleles and nearby genetic loci. We find that the relevance of ethnic background depends on the question. If asked whether the association of variants with disease risk is conserved across ethnic boundaries, we find that the answer is yes, the majority of markers show insignificant variability in association with cancer risk across ethnic groups. However if the question is whether a significant association between a variant and cancer risk is likely to reproduce, the answer is no, most markers do not validate in an ethnic group other than the discovery cohort's ancestry. This lack of reproducibility is not attributable to studies being inadequately populated due to low allele frequency in other ethnic groups. Instead, differences in local genomic structure between ethnic groups are associated with the strength of association with cancer risk and therefore confound interpretation of the implied physiologic association tracked by the disease allele. This suggest that a biological association for cancer risk alleles may be broadly consistent across ethnic boundaries, but reproduction of a clinical study in another ethnic group is uncommon, in part due to confounding genomic architecture. As clinical studies are increasingly performed globally this has important implications for how cancer risk stratifiers should be studied and employed.
    PLoS ONE 06/2014; 9(6):e97522. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0097522 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is partly conferred by common, low-penetrance single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We hypothesized that these SNPs are associated with outcomes in metastatic CRC. Six candidate SNPs from 8q24, 10p14, 15q13, 18q21 were investigated for their association with response rate (RR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) among 524 patients treated on a phase III clinical trial of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic CRC. rs10795668 was weakly associated with TTP (p = 0.02), but not RR or OS. No other SNPs carried statistically significant HRs for any of the primary outcomes (RR, TTP or OS). Common low-penetrance CRC risk SNPs were not associated with outcomes among patients with metastatic CRC.
    PLoS ONE 04/2014; 9(4):e94727. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0094727 · 3.53 Impact Factor