4.5 Article

Glutathione Pathway Genetic Polymorphisms and Lung Cancer Survival After Platinum-Based Chemotherapy

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 811-821

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0871

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [R01 GM28157, R01 CA80127, R01 CA84354, R01 CA115857, R01 CA132780, R03 CA77118, U01 GM61388]
  2. PhRMA Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Lung cancer is commonly treated with platinum compounds. The glutathione pathway participates in the metabolism of platinum compounds. We set out to test the hypotheses that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or copy number polymorphisms for genes within the glutathione pathway might influence survival in lung cancer patients treated with these drugs. Methods: Germline DNA samples from 973 lung cancer patients were genotyped for 290 glutathione pathway SNPs. GSTT1 copy number was also assayed. We determined the association of these polymorphisms with survival for lung cancer patients, followed by functional genomic validation. Results: We observed suggestive associations between survival and GSTT1 copy number (P = 0.017), and GSTA5, GSTM4, and ABCC4 SNPs, adjusted for covariates (P = 0.018, 0.002, and 0.002, respectively) or not (P = 0.005, 0.011, and 0.002). One hundred lymphoblastoid cell lines were then treated with cisplatin, and IC(50) values were significantly associated with the GSTM4 SNP (P = 0.019). Furthermore, GSTM4, GSTT1, and ABCC4 overexpression significantly decreased cisplatin sensitivity in lung cancer and HEK293T cell lines. Conclusions: These results suggest that GSTM4 polymorphisms are biomarkers for the prediction of cisplatin response. ABCC4 polymorphisms, as well as GSTT1 copy number, may also help to predict cisplatin response, but further validation is required. These results represent a step toward the individualized chemotherapy of lung cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(3); 811-21. (C) 2010 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