4.7 Article

A Six-Nucleotide Insertion-Deletion Polymorphism in the CASP8 Promoter Associated with Risk and Progression of Bladder Cancer

Journal

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 15, Issue 7, Pages 2567-2572

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-2829

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30571583, 30872084]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK2006231]
  3. Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China [20060390293]
  4. Postdoctoral Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [0601049]
  5. Young Academic Leader of Jiangsu Province (2006)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Caspase-8 (CASP8) is a key regulator of apoptosis or programmed cell death, an essential defense mechanism against hyperproliferation and malignancy. We hypothesized that the variants in the CASP8 gene are associated with risk of bladder cancer. Experimental Design: In a hospital-based case-control study of 365 case patients with newly diagnosed bladder transitional cell carcinoma and 368 cancer-free controls frequency-matched by age and sex, we genotyped the functional -652 6N ins/del polymorphism (rs3834129) in the promoter of CASP8 and assessed its associations with risk of bladder cancer and interaction with tobacco smoking. Results: A significant decreased risk of bladder cancer was found for the CASP8 -652 6N ins/del (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.99) and del/del (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.77) genotypes. Furthermore, a significant additive interaction between CASP8 polymorphism and tobacco smoking on bladder cancer risk was observed. Conclusions: These results suggested that the CASP8 -652 6N ins/del polymorphism is involved in etiology of bladder cancer and thus may be a marker for genetic susceptibility to bladder cancer in Chinese populations. Larger studies are warranted to validate our findings.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available