| 1. |
- Jenab, Mazda, et al.
(författare)
-
Vitamin D receptor and Calcium sensing receptor Polymorphisms and the risk of Colorectal Cancer in European populations
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. - : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1055-9965 .- 1538-7755. ; 18, s. 2485-2491
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Increased levels of vitamin D and calcium may play a protective role in colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. It has been suggested that these effects may be mediated by genetic variants of the vitamin D receptor (VDR) and the calcium sensing receptor (CASR). However, current epidemiologic evidence from European populations for a role of these genes in CRC risk is scarce. In addition, it is not clear whether these genes may modulate CRC risk independently or by interaction with blood vitamin D concentration and level of dietary calcium intake. A case-control study was conducted nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. CRC cases (1,248) were identified and matched to 1,248 control subjects. Genotyping for the VDR (BsmI: rs1544410; Fok1: rs2228570) and CASR (rs1801725) genes was done by Taqman, and serum vitamin D (25OHD) concentrations were measured. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the incidence rate ratio (RR). Compared with the wild-type bb, the BB genotype of the VDR BsmI polymorphism was associated with a reduced risk of CRC [RR, 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.59-0.98). The association was observed for colon cancer (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.45-0.95) but not rectal cancer (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.62-1.49). The Fok1 and CASR genotypes were not associated with CRC risk in this study. No interactions were noted for any of the polymorphisms with serum 25OHD concentration or level of dietary calcium. These results confirm a role for the BsmI polymorphism of the VDR gene in CRC risk, independent of serum 25OHD concentration and dietary calcium intake. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(9):2485-91).
|
|
| 2. |
- McKay, James D., et al.
(författare)
-
Vitamin D Receptor Polymorphisms and Breast Cancer Risk: Results from the National Cancer Institute Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. - 1538-7755. ; 18:1, s. 297-305
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Vitamin D is hypothesized to lower the risk of breast cancer by inhibiting cell proliferation via the nuclear vitamin D receptor (VDR). Two common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in the VDR gene (VDR), rs154441.0 (BsmI), and rs2228570 (FokI), have been inconsistently associated with breast cancer risk. Increased risk has been reported for the FokIff genotype, which encodes a less transcriptionally active isoform of VDR, and reduced risk has been reported for the BsmI BB genotype, a SNP in strong linkage disequilibrium with a 3'-untranslated region, which may influence VDR mRNA stability. Methods: We pooled data from 6 prospective studies in the National Cancer Institute Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium to examine associations between these SNPs and breast cancer among >6,300 cases and 8,100 controls for each SNP using conditional logistic regression. Results: The odds ratio (OR) for the rs2228570 (FokI) ff versus FF genotype in the overall population was statistically significantly elevated [OR, 1-1.6; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.04-1.28] but was weaker once data from the cohort with previously published positive findings were removed (OR, 1.1.0; 95% CI, 0.981.24). No association was noted between rs1544410 (Bsm I) BB and breast cancer risk overall (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.09), but the BB genotype was associated with a significantly lower risk of advanced breast cancer (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60-0.92). Conclusions: Although the evidence for independent contributions of these variants to breast cancer susceptibility remains equivocal, future large studies should integrate genetic variation in VDR with biomarkers of vitamin D status. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(1):297-305)
|
|
