4.5 Article

Association between single-nucleotide polymorphisms in hormone metabolism and DNA repair genes and epithelial ovarian cancer: Results from two Australian studies and an additional validation set

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume 16, Issue 12, Pages 2557-2565

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0542

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Cancer Research UK [10124, A10124, A10119] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA016056, CA16056, R01 CA61107, CA71766] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although some high-risk ovarian cancer genes have been identified, it is likely that common low penetrance alleles exist that confer some increase in ovarian cancer risk. We have genotyped nine putative functional single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in genes involved in steroid hormone synthesis (SRD5A2, CYP19A1, HSB17B1, and HSD17B4) and DNA repair (XRCC2, XRCC3, BRCA2, and RAD52) using two Australian ovarian cancer case-control studies, comprising a total of 1,466 cases and 1,821 controls of Caucasian origin. Genotype frequencies in cases and controls were compared using logistic regression. The only SNP we found to be associated with ovarian cancer risk in both of these two studies was SRD5A2 V89L (rs523349), which showed a significant trend of increasing risk per rare allele (P = 0.00002). We then 2 genotyped another SNP in this gene (rs632148; r(2) = 0.945 with V89L) in an attempt to validate this finding in an independent set of 1,479 cases and 2,452 controls from United Kingdom, United States, and Denmark. There was no association between rs632148 and ovarian cancer risk in the validation samples, and overall, there was no significant heterogeneity between the results of the five studies. Further analyses of SNPs in this gene are therefore warranted to determine whether SRD5A2 plays a role in ovarian cancer predisposition.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available