4.8 Article

Common variants in RB1 gene and risk of invasive ovarian cancer

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 66, 期 20, 页码 10220-10226

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-2222

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA16056, R01 CA61107, CA71766] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Somatic alteration of the RB1 gene is common in several types of cancer, and germ-line variants are implicated in others. We have used a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) tagging approach to evaluate the association between common variants (SNP) in RB1 and risks of invasive ovarian cancer. We genotyped 11 tagging SNPs in three ovarian case-control studies from the United Kingdom, United States, and Denmark, comprising > 1500 cases and 4,800 controls. Two SNPs showed significant association with ovarian cancer risk: carriers of the minor allele of rs2854344 were at reduced risk compared with the common homozygotes [odds ratio (OR), 0.73; 95% confidence interval (95% Cl), 0.61-0.89; P = 0.0009 dominant model]. Similarly, the minor allele of rs4151620 was found to be associated with reduced risk (rare versus common homozygote; OR, 0.19; 95% Cl, 0.07-0.53; P = 0.00005 recessive model). After adjusting for multiple testing, the most significant association (rs4151620) was P = 0.001. A global test comparing common haplotype frequencies in cases and controls was of borderline significance (P-8df = 0.04). There are no common coding SNPs in the RB1 gene. However, intron 17 of RB1 contains the open reading frame for the P2RY5 gene, and rs4151620 is perfectly correlated with rs2227311, which is located in the 5'-untranslated region of P2RY5 and is predicted to affect P2RY5 transcription. rs2854344 has been reported previously to be associated with breast cancer risk. The possible associations of rs2854344 and rs4151620 with ovarian cancer risk warrant confirmation in independent case-control studies before studies on their biological mode of action.

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

4.8
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