4.5 Article

Prediagnosis Leukocyte Telomere Length and Risk of Ovarian Cancer

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 26, 期 3, 页码 339-345

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0466

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute at the NIH [R01 CA163451]
  2. U.S. Department of Defense [W81XWH-13-1-0493]
  3. NIH [UM1 CA186107, P01 CA87969, UM1 CA17672]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The associations between telomere length and cancer risk are equivocal, and none have examined the association between prediagnosis leukocyte telomere length (LTL) and the risk of developing ovarian cancer. Methods: We prospectively measured LTL collected from 442 ovarian cancer cases and 727 controls in the Nurses' Health Studies and the Northern Sweden Health and Disease Study. Cases were matched to one or two controls on age, menopausal status, and date of blood collection. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Results: LTL was measured a median of 9.5 years before ovarian cancer diagnosis among cases. We observed a decreased risk of ovarian cancer with longer LTL. In multivariable models, women in the top quartile of LTL had an OR for ovarian cancer of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.46-0.97) compared with those in the bottom quartile. Inverse associations were stronger for nonserous cases (ORquartile (4 vs. quartile 1 of LTL) = 0.55, 95% CI, 0.33-0.94) and rapidly fatal cases (i.e., cases who died within 3 years of diagnosis; ORquartile 4 vs. quartile 1 of LTL = 0.55, 95% CI, 0.32-0.95). Conclusions: Our prospective findings suggest that longer circulating LTL may be associated with a lower ovarian cancer risk, especially for nonserous and rapidly fatal cases. The evaluation of LTL in relation to ovarian cancer risk by tumor subtypes is warranted in larger prospective studies. Impact: Prediagnosis LTL may reflect an early event in the ovarian cancer development and could serve as a biomarker to predict future risk. (C)2017 AACR.

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