4.4 Article

Combined effect of tobacco and DNA repair genes polymorphisms of XRCC1 and XRCC2 influence high risk of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in northeast Indian population

期刊

MEDICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 31, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-014-0067-8

关键词

XRCC1; XRCC2; Smoking; Tobacco-betel quid chewing; Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tobacco consumption in various forms is one of the major risk factor for the development of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Polymorphisms in XRCC1 and XRCC2 genes may alter an individual's susceptibility to tobacco-related cancers. Here, we have investigated the interaction of XRCC1 (Arg399Gln) and XRCC2 (Arg188His) polymorphism and tobacco exposure in the progression of HNSCC in northeast Indian population. The population-based case-control study includes 110 HNSCC patients and 140 controls. The polymorphisms of XRCC1 and XRCC2 were studied by means of PCR-RFLP, and the results were confirmed by DNA sequencing. Smokers and tobacco-betel quid chewers were significantly higher in cases (P = 0.045 and 0.033). The variant homozygote AA genotype of XRCC1 Arg399Gln and heterozygote GA genotype of XRCC2 Arg188His has an increased risk toward HNSCC (OR 2.43; P = 0.031 and OR 3.29; P < 0.01, respectively). The interaction between tobacco-betel quid chewing and variant genotypes of XRCC1 and XRCC2 resulted in several fold increase the risk of HNSCC, when compared to non-chewers. Heavy smokers carrying XRCC1 AA and XRCC2 GA genotypes had a significantly higher risk of HNSCC compared to never smokers (P = 0.017 and 0.003, respectively). Upon gene-gene interaction analysis, individuals carrying both XRCC1 GA (Arg/Gln) and XRCC2 GA (Arg/His) genotypes had the highest risk of HNSCC (P = 0.001). Our finding suggests that interaction of tobacco and polymorphisms of XRCC1 and XRCC2 increases the risk of HNSCC. Furthermore, cross talk between these two DNA repair genes might modulate susceptibility toward HNSCC.

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

4.4
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