4.2 Article

N-Acetyltransferase 2, glutathione S-transferase gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma in an Algerian population

期刊

XENOBIOTICA
卷 52, 期 1, 页码 99-104

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00498254.2022.2040642

关键词

Hepatocellular carcinoma; GSTM1; GSTT1; NAT2; genetic polymorphism; xenobiotic metabolising enzymes

资金

  1. Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the potential association of genetic polymorphisms of GSTM1, GSTT1, and NAT2 genes and epidemiological parameters with the risk of HCC in the Algerian population. The results showed that the GSTM1 null and NAT2 slow acetylator genotypes are associated with an increased risk of HCC, particularly in smokers. No significant association was found for the GSTT1 null genotype in the contribution to HCC risk.
This study was conducted to investigate the potential association of genetic polymorphisms of glutathione S-transferase M1/T1 (GSTM1, GSTT1), and N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) genes and epidemiological parameters with the risk of HCC in the Algerian population. A case-control study including 132 confirmed HCC patients and 141 cancer-free controls was performed. Genotyping analysis was performed using conventional multiplex PCR and PCR-RFLP. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square test. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). GSTM1 null and NAT2 slow acetylator genotypes confer an increased risk to HCC (OR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.16-3.05; OR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.26-4.18, respectively). This association was prevalent in smokers (OR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.05-3.8 and OR = 2.55, 95% CI 1.22-5.34, respectively). No significant association was observed for GSTT1 null genotype in the contribution to HCC risk (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.46-1.27). In conclusion, the GSTM1 and NAT2 gene polymorphisms are positively associated with the risk of HCC in older men and especially in smokers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据