4.7 Article

Functional PIN1 promoter polymorphisms associated with risk of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in Southern Chinese populations

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-04156-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81372137, 30973374, 81402415]
  2. Training Plan for Outstanding Young Teachers in Higher Education Institutions of Guangdong Province [YQ201403/YQ2014086]
  3. Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [2015jj6066]
  4. Research Program of Guangdong Medical University [Z2013004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our previous work reported the association between two single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in PIN1 promoter and nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) risk with a small sample size in a low incidence area. This study investigated the association between the two SNPs and NPC risk in 733 patients and 895 controls from a high incidence area. The results indicated the genotype and allele frequencies of -842G > C and -667C > T were both significantly different between patients and controls even using the resampling statistics. The -842GC and -667TT genotypes showed a significantly increased risk of NPC (OR = 1.977, 95% CI = 1.339-2.919, P = 0.001 and OR = 1.438, 95% CI = 1.061-1.922, P = 0.019, respectively). Compared to the most common -842G-667C haplotype, -842G-667T haplotype and -842C-667C haplotype showed a significantly increased risk of NPC (OR = 1.215, 95% CI = 1.053-1.402, P = 0.008 and OR = 2.268, 95% CI = 1.530-3.362, P = 0.001, respectively). Further reporter gene expression suggested that variant -842C-667C and -842G-667T were associated with an enhanced transcriptional activity. In conclusion, our findings suggest that -842G > C and -667C > T in PIN1 promoter are associated with NPC risk; as well as the promoter activity is mediated by functional PIN1 variants.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available