4.5 Article

Association between interleukin 17/interleukin 17 receptor gene polymorphisms and papillary thyroid cancer in Korean population

期刊

CYTOKINE
卷 71, 期 2, 页码 283-288

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cyto.2014.11.011

关键词

Thyroid neoplasm; Interleukin-17; Receptors; Polymorphism; Single nucleotide

资金

  1. Kyung Hee University [KHU-20120472]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although numerous recent studies have implicated a role for interleukin 17(IL17) in tumor development, the mechanisms of IL17 involvement are still uncharacterized. The aims of this study were to determine whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in IL17 and IL17R contribute to the development of papillary thyroid cancer (FTC) and to assess the relationship between IL17 and IL17R SNPs and the clinicopathologic characteristics of PTC. Materials and methods: Eight SNPs located within the IL17A, IL17RA, and IL17RB genes were genotyped using direct sequencing in 94 patients with PTC and 260 patients without FTC (controls). Genetic data were analyzed using commercially available software. Statistical analyses were then performed to examine the relationships between these SNPs and the clinicopathologic characteristics of PTC. Results: Genotyping analysis demonstrated that the IL17RA SNP rs4819554 (codominant model 1, odds ratio (OR) = 0.39, P = 0.001) and the IL17RB SNP rs1025689 (dominant model, OR = 0.59, P = 0.043) were significantly associated with lack of Pit. Interestingly, the IL17A.SNP rs2275913 (codominant model 2, OR = 0.19, P = 0.034) was significantly associated with lack of multifocality. Furthermore, the IL17RA SNP rs4819554 (dominant model, OR = 0.25, P = 0.010) was significantly associated with lack of cancer bilaterality. Conclusion: In this study of SNPs in the IL17 and IL17R genes in patients with FTC, we demonstrated that IL17RA polymorphisms can influence both the development and the bilaterality of Pit. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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