4.5 Article

Comparative evaluation of trace metal distribution and correlation in human malignant and benign breast tissues

Journal

BIOLOGICAL TRACE ELEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 125, Issue 1, Pages 30-40

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12011-008-8158-z

Keywords

breast cancer; trace metals; multivariate analysis; correlation; AAS; Pakistan

Funding

  1. Higher Education Commission
  2. Government of Pakistan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Selected trace metals were analyzed in human malignant and nonmalignant ( benign) breast tissue samples by the flame atomic absorption spectrophotometric method. In malignant tissues, dominant mean concentrations were revealed by Na, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn, and Al at 927, 552, 231, 61.7, 36.5, 18.3, and 8.94 mu g/g, respectively, while the mean metal levels in benign tissues were 903, 435, 183, 63.3, 24.7, 14.5, and 10.1 mu g/g, respectively. Average concentrations of Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, K, Ca, and Zn were noted to be significantly higher in the malignant tissues compared with the benign tissues. Significantly strong correlations ( r > 0.50) in malignant tissues were observed between Mn and Co, Mn and Cd, Cd and Cr, Fe and Mn, Cd and Co, Fe and Co, Mg and Pb, Cd and Fe, Mg and Ni, Pb and Ni, Ni and Sr, and Fe and Pb, whereas, Cd and Co, Cd and Mn, Co and Mg, Co and Mn, Cu and Mn, Co and Ni, Mg and Ni, Cd and Cu, Cd and Ni, Ca and Mg, Mn and Pb, Cu and Ni, Fe and Ni, Cd and Mg, Co and Cu, Cr and Na, and Cd and Cr revealed strong and significant relationships in benign tissues at p < 0.001. Principal component analysis of the metals data yielded six principal components for malignant tissues and five principal components for benign tissues, with considerably different loadings, duly supported by cluster analysis. The study revealed a considerably different pattern of distribution and mutual correlations of trace metals in the breast tissues of benign and cancerous 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available