4.3 Article

A common variant near TERC and telomere length are associated with susceptibility to childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in Chinese

期刊

LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA
卷 53, 期 9, 页码 1688-1692

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2012.671482

关键词

TERC; genetic variants; susceptibility; telomere length; childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30972444, 81102089]
  2. Key Program of Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK2010080]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK2011773, BK2011775]
  4. Key Program for Basic Research of Jiangsu Provincial Department of Education [08KJA330001, 11KJB330002]
  5. Qin Lan Project of Jiangsu Provincial Department of Education
  6. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (Public Health and Preventive Medicine)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Telomeres are involved in maintaining chromosomal stability, cellular immortality and tumorigenesis. A recent genome-wide association study has identified an association between telomere length and two common variants (rs12696304 and rs16847897) at 3q26 that includes TERC. We hypothesized that the two variants and relative telomere length (RTL) would be predictors of the risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). A case-control study of 570 cases and 673 cancer-free controls among Chinese children was performed. We found that there was a protective relationship between the second and third quartiles of RTL and risk of ALL [adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) by quartile: 0.65 (0.47-0.91), 0.56 (0.40-0.79)], compared with the first quartile (shortest) RTL. Moreover, rs16847897 CG genotype increased the risk of childhood ALL by 29% compared with the CC genotype. Our findings indicate that extreme telomere length may be a potential predictor for future risk of ALL, and TERC rs16847897 may contribute to the development of childhood ALL.

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

4.3
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