4.5 Article

1,3-Butadiene Exposure and Metabolism among Japanese American, Native Hawaiian, and White Smokers

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages 2240-2249

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0492

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH [5P01CA138338, R01 CA85997, P30 CA014089, P30 CA071789-13]
  2. [UM1 CA164973]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We hypothesize that the differences in lung cancer risk in Native Hawaiians, whites, and Japanese Americans may, in part, be due to variation in the metabolism of 1,3-butadiene, one of the most abundant carcinogens in cigarette smoke. Methods: We measured two biomarkers of 1,3-butadiene exposure, monohydroxybutyl mercapturic acid (MHBMA) and dihydroxybutyl mercapturic acid (DHBMA), in overnight urine samples among 584 Native Hawaiians, Japanese Americans, and white smokers in Hawaii. These values were normalized to creatinine levels. Ethnic-specific geometric means were compared adjusting for age at urine collection, sex, body mass index, and nicotine equivalents (a marker of total nicotine uptake). Results: We found that mean urinary MHBMA differed by race/ethnicity (P = 0.0002). The values were highest in whites and lowest in Japanese Americans. This difference was only observed in individuals with the GSTT1-null genotype (P = 0.0001). No difference across race/ethnicity was found among those with at least one copy of the GSTT1 gene (P >= 0.72). Mean urinary DHBMA did not differ across racial/ethnic groups. Conclusions: The difference in urinary MHBMA excretion levels from cigarette smoking across three ethnic groups is, in part, explained by the GSTT1 genotype. Mean urinary MHBMA levels are higher in whites among GSTT1-null smokers. Impact: The overall higher excretion levels of MHBMA in whites and lower levels of MHBMA in Japanese Americans are consistent with the higher lung cancer risk in the former. However, the excretion levels of MHBMA in Native Hawaiians are not consistent with their disease risk and thus unlikely to explain their high risk of lung cancer. (C)2014 AACR.

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