4.6 Article

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

Journal

BMC CANCER
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07145-0

Keywords

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

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available