4.5 Article

Genetic Polymorphism of CCR2-64I Increased the Susceptibility of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 102, Issue 3, Pages 264-270

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jso.21623

Keywords

monocyte chemoattractant protein-1; chemokine receptor-2; hepatocellular carcinoma; polymorphism

Funding

  1. National Science Council, Taiwan [NSC-98-2314-B-040-014-MY3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate genetic impact of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and its receptor chemokine receptor-2 (CCR2) gene polymorphisms on the susceptibility and clinicopathological characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: A total of 446 subjects, including 344 healthy controls and 102 patients with HCC, were recruited in this study and subjected to PCR-RFLP to estimate the impact of these two polymorphic variants on HCC. Results: No relationship between MCP-1 2518G/A gene polymorphism and HCC risk was found among our recruited HCC patients and healthy controls. However, there was a significantly increased risk (AOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.11-3.29) of having HCC among subjects with GA heterozygotes of CCR2 V64I after adjusting for other confoundings. There was no synergistic effect between gene polymorphism and environmental risk factors, including tobacco and alcohol consumptions, as well as clinicopathological parameters of HCC for MCP-1 -2518G/A and CCR2 V64I genes, respectively. Conclusions: CCR2-64I gene polymorphism is an important factor for the susceptibility of HCC but it might not influence the clinical pathological progression of HCC, and the contribution of CCR2-64I gene polymorphism on the susceptibility of HCC could be not through the affection of liver injury-related clinical pathological characteristics. J. Surg. Oncol. 2010;102:264-270. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available