4.7 Article

The relationship between the CYP2D6 polymorphisms and tamoxifen efficacy in adjuvant endocrine therapy of breast cancer patients in Chinese Han population

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 143, Issue 1, Pages 184-189

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31291

Keywords

breast cancer; TAM; CYP2D6; SNP; survival

Categories

Funding

  1. CAMS Initiative for Innovative Medicine [CAMS-12M-1-010, 2017-I2M-3-004]
  2. Major Project of Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission [D161100000816004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Variants of the CYP2D6 gene may lead to a poor prognosis of tamoxifen (TAM)-treated patients. Our study validated the association between the CYP2D6 genotype and outcomes of patients receiving TAM in adjuvant endocrine therapy. A total of 778 breast cancer patients who received adjuvant TAM (n = 325) or aromatase inhibitors (AIs) (n = 453) at the National Cancer Center were analyzed. Nine single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the CYP2D6 gene were selected from online databases. The associations of each SNP genotype with disease-free survival (DFS) and clinicopathological characteristics were analyzed. A total of 167 (21.5%) patients carried the CYP2D6*10 (c.100C>T) T/T genotype. Among the 325 patients who received TAM, the 5-year DFS rate was considerably lower in CYP2D6*10 T/T genotype patients than C/C or C/T patients (54.9% vs. 70.9%, p = 0.007). The T/T genotype for CYP2D6*10 was a significant prognostic marker for DFS in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 1.87; p = 0.006). The CYP2D6*10 genotype in women who received AIs was not significantly associated with DFS (p = 0.332). Other SNPs were not related to the survival of patients who received TAM. Our finding showed patients with CYP2D6*10 T/T received less benefit from TAM adjuvant treatment. This conclusion may optimize the individualized treatments for this subgroup of patients.

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