4.4 Article

WISP1 genetic variants as predictors of tumor development with urothelial cell carcinoma

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.11.023

Keywords

Urothelial cell carcinoma; WISP1; Polymorphism

Funding

  1. Chung Shan Medical University Hospital [CSH-2017-C-019]
  2. Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan [CSMU-INT-106-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) of the urinary bladder is a major malignancy of the genitourinary tract. Etiological factors, such as the environment, ethnicity, genetics, and diet, contribute to UCC carcinogenesis. WNT1-inducible signaling pathway protein 1 (WISP1), also known as CCN4, a cysteine-rich protein belonging to the Cyr61, CTGF, Nov (CCN) family of matricellular proteins, has many developmental functions and might be involved in carcinogenesis. This study investigated WISP1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms to evaluate UCC susceptibility and clinicopathological characteristics. Materials and methods: Real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to analyze 4 single-nucleotide polymorphisms of WISP1 in 369 patients with UCC and 738 controls without cancer. Results: The results showed that in 128 women with UCC who carried WISP1 rs2929973 (AG + GG) variants had a higher risk of developing an advanced muscle-invasive tumor stage (pT2 pT4, P = 0.007) and a large tumor (T1 T4, P = 0.030). Further analyses revealed that a correlation between the expressions of WISP1 and invasive tumor and large tumor size in urothelial carcinoma was observed in the TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) dataset. Conclusions: Our results indicated that patients with UCC carrying rs2977530 genetic variants (AG + GG) have a higher risk of developing a more invasive tumor stage and a large tumor. WISP1 polymorphisms may serve as a marker or a therapeutic target in UCC. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available