|
Chun-Xia Yang,
Department of Epidemiology, Huaxi Public Health School, Sichuan
University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
Chun-Xia Yang, Keitaro Matsuo, Kazuo Tajima, Division
of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research
Institute, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan
Zhi-Ming Wang, Huaxi Public Health School, Sichuan
University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
Correspondence to: Keitaro Matsuo, Division of Epidemiology
and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, 1-1
Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan.
kmastuo@aichi-cc.jp
Telephone: +81-52-762-6111
Fax: +81-52-763-5233
Received: 2004-09-24
Accepted: 2004-11-19
Abstract
Aim: Phase I/II
enzymes metabolize environmental carcin-ogens and several functional
polymorphisms have been reported in their encoding genes. Although
their significance with regard to esophageal carcinogenicity has
been examined epidemiologically, it remains controversial. The
present systematic review of the literature was performed to clarify
associations.
Methods:
Eligible studies were case-control or cohort studies published until
September 2004 that were written in any language. From PubMed and a
manual review of refe-rence lists in relevant review articles, we
obtained 16 studies related to the CYP1A1 Ile-Val
substitution in exon 7, CYP1A1 MspI polymorphisms, CYP2E1
RsaI polymorphisms, GSTM1 null type, GSTT1 null
type and GSTP1 Ile104Val. All were of case-control design.
Summary statistics were odds ratios (ORs) comparing heterozygous-,
homozygous-non-wild type or these two in combination with the
homozygous wild type, or the null type with the non-null type for GSTM1
and GSTT1. A random effect model was used to estimate the
summary ORs. A meta-regression analysis was applied to explore
sources of heterogeneity.
Results:
Individuals with the Ile-Val substitution in CYP1A1 exon 7
had increased esophageal cancer risk, with ORs (95%CI) compared with
Ile/Ile of 1.37 (1.09-1.71), 2.52 (1.62-3.91) and 1.44
(1.17-1.78) for Ile-Val, Val/Val genotype and the
combined group. No significant association was found between
esophageal cancer risk and the other genetic parameters.
Conclusion: A
significant association exists between the CYP1A1 Ile-Val
polymorphism and risk of esophageal cancer. Polymorphisms that
increase the internal exposure to activated carcinogens may increase
the risk of esophageal cancer.
� 2005 The WJG Press and Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Key words: CYPs; GSTs; Gene polymorphisms; Esophageal cancer;
Meta-analysis
Yang CX, Matsuo K, Wang ZM, Tajima K. Phase I/II enzyme gene
polymorphisms and esophageal cancer risk: A meta-analysis of the
literature. World J Gastroenterol
2005; 11(17): 2531-2538
http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/11/2531.asp
INTRODUCTION
Most environmental chemical carcinogens undergo activation by
phase I enzymes, often in an oxidation reaction, and detoxication by
phase II enzymes. The cytochrome P450 enzyme superfamily constitutes
the majority of phase I enzymes, while the
glutathione-S-transferases (GSTs) and N-acetyltransferase are
primarily responsible for the detoxication of xenobiotics. The
drug-metabolizing enzymes often display genetic polymorphisms, which
may alter the enzyme activity and thus impact on the risk of cancer.
The enzyme CYP1A1 is involved in the
activation of major classes of tobacco procarcinogens, like
polyaromatic hydrocarbons and aromatic amines, and is present in
many epithelial tissues[1].
CYP1A1 Ile-Val substitution in the heme-binding region
results in a two-fold increase in microsomal enzyme activity and is
in complete linkage disequilibrium in Caucasians with the CYP1A1
MspI polymorphism, which has also been associated
experimentally with increased catalytic activity[2].
CYP2E1 is primarily responsible for the metabolic activation of many
low molecular weight carcinogens[3],
including certain nitrosamines, which may be involved in
carcinogenesis of the esophagus. This enzyme is also believed to
participate in the oxidation of other compounds, such as ethanol, to
produce reactive free radicals that may initiate lipid peroxidation
and consequently influence carcinogenesis[4].
The variant c2 allele
recognized by RsaI digestion in the 5�-flanking region of
the gene appears to be associated with decreased enzyme activity[5].
GSTs are a family of multifunctional enzymes
which metabolize a variety of xenobiotics with a large overlap in
the substrate specificity. Individuals who are homozygous for the
null GSTM1 or null GSTT1 alleles lack the respective
enzyme functions[6,7].
GSTP1 is a major GST isoform expressed in human esophagus[8],
which can eliminate DNA oxidative products of thymidine or uracil
propenal[9].
After induction by cytochrome P450, some cigarette-related
carcinogens, such as benzo[a]pyrene diol epoxide and acrolein, can
also be eliminated by GSTP1[10].
The Ile-Val substitution at residue 104 may be associated with a
higher level of DNA adducts[11],
thus increasing the susceptibility to cancer induction.
Therefore, the CYP1A1 Val allele, the
CYP1A1 MspI non-wild allele, the null type of GSTM1 and GSTT1
as well as the GSTP1 Val allele may increase the risk of
esophageal cancer, while the CYP2E1 c2 allele (recognized by RsaI
digestion) may decrease the risk. Based on the possible biological
significance of CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1, GSTT1
and GSTP1 polymorphisms on cancer susceptibility, several
epidemiologic studies have been conducted to assess their
association with esophageal cancer. However, most studies featured
only small samples and the results were not always consistent. To
obtain a better understanding of the significance of gene
polymorphisms with regard to esophageal cancer risk, we performed a
systematic review of all the relevant studies published in the
literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Selection of studies
Before the study, we defined inclusion criteria as follows: (1)
any study design giving relative risk (an OR or a risk ratio) for
candidate gene (CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1)
polymorphisms regarding the risk of esophageal cancer (including
both squamous cell carcinomas and adenocarcinomas); (2) inclusion of
non-cancer or disease-free subjects as a control group; (3) already
published in any language but cited in PubMed.
All the studies were obtained via PubMed using
key words �CYP1A1�, �CYP2E1�, �GSTM1�, �GESTT1� and
�GSTP1� in combination with �esophageal cancer� to identify
potentially relevant articles. A total of 45 articles were captured,
and 21, 28, 20, 12, and 12 were related to CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1,
GSTT1, and GSTP1, respectively. We selected all the studies, which
provided a relative risk with the candidate gene.
We examined abstracts of all the candidate
articles to decide whether to include/exclude in the further
detailed review. Thereby, we excluded a total of 22 studies due to
inappropriate study design; among them, 8, 18, 5, 4, and 4 were
related to CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1,
respectively. Among the 22 excluded articles, five were reviews[1,
12-15], three concerned the expression of cytochrome
P450 (CYPs) in esophageal mucosa[16-18],
four covered animal experiments[19-22],
three compared gene polymorphism frequ-encies among different
populations[23-25],
one focused on the metabolism of N-nitrosobenzylmethylamine
by human cytochrome P450 enzyme[26],
one was related to gastric cancer, not esophageal cancer[27],
and other five were incompatible with the inclusion criteria[28-32].
Other studies were further excluded based upon
detailed review because in three cases[33-35]
they were the same study as in two other papers[36].
The newest two studies were retained for the analysis. Three more
studies were excluded because they did not provide relevant
information required for our analysis. Most of them did not apply
subjects with other diseases as control groups and did not provide
relative risk of esophageal cancer for candidate gene polymorp-hisms[37-39].
One study was excluded since it was the only example which examined
associations between a tandem repeat polymorphism of CYP2E1
and the risk of cancer[40].
Finally, a total of 16 case-control studies were
included in the meta-analysis (Table
1), 9, 5, 12, 6 and 7 concerning CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1, GSTT1 and
GSTP1, respectively. All the potentially relevant articles were
reviewed by two independent investigators (Y.CX. and M.K.).
We also tried to use �esophageal� combined
with candidate genes as keywords to search for much more relevant
articles as well as check the reference lists in the reviews and
selected original investigations and found no additional eligible
articles.
Data abstraction
Two investigators using a standard information extraction form
independently abstracted data. Characteristics abstracted from the
articles included the name of the first author, year of publication,
location of the study, study design, mean age for all cases and
controls, the percentage of males in the case and control groups,
matched factors as well as adjusted factors; number of cases, number
of controls, number of cases and controls with each genotype of
candidate poly-morphisms, and overall crude or adjusted odds ratios
(ORs) with their 95%CI. For one study[41],
which supplied the result for both present controls and total
controls (including historic control and the present control), total
control data were selected for our meta-analysis.
Statistical analysis
The STATA statistical package (version 8, stata, College Station,
TX) was used for the meta-analysis. The homozygous wild type was
used as the reference group for CYP1A1, CYP2E1 and GSTP1,
and the non-null type for GSTM1 and GSTT1. With four
papers[36,44,47,48]
whose reference groups were defined in the opposite way, the ORs
were inverted for our analysis. Adjusted ORs were employed for the
present meta-analysis if available in the reports, otherwise, crude
ORs were used. Since some of the original studies did not provide
the ORs but the genotype frequencies were available, crude ORs were
then calculated and employed for our meta-analysis. A random-effect
model was applied to obtain summary ORs and their 95%CIs since the
results with fixed-effect models are the same as with random-effect
models if there is no heterogeneity across the studies. A
random-effect model should be applied if heterogeneity exists.
Publication bias was graphically assessed by funnel plots and
statistically assessed by Egger�s test. Meta-regression analysis
was applied to explore potential sources of heterog-eneity. The
factors, study design, Chinese population (yes/no), Asian population
(yes/no), publication year (after 2 000 or not), number of cases and
controls (both greater than 100 or not) and matching (matched for
sex and age or not) were examined. Statistical significance was
defined as a P-value less than 0.05 except for
meta-regression analyses, which used a P-value 0.10 because
of the relatively weak statistical power.
RESULTS
In the final analysis, we had a total of 16 case-control studies
consisting of 3 hospital-based (controls selected from non-cancer
patients), 12 population-based (controls selected from the healthy
population) and 1 without a clear type. Among them, 9 were studies
of the CYP1A1 exon 7 Ile-Val substitution, 1[53]
without any Ile-Val substitution in either cases and controls, 5
concerned the CYP1A1 MspI polymorphism, 5 the CYP2E1 Rsal
polymorphism, 12 the GSTM1 null type, 6 the GSTT1 null
type and 7 the GSTP1 Ile-Val substitution (Table 1).
Table 1 (PDF) Summary of studies
included in the analysis of CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GASTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1
For CYP1A1 exon 7 Ile-Val substitution,
all ORs for the Ile/Val genotype and the combined group were
larger than 1 when compared with the Ile/Ile genotype,
although only one study demonstrated a significantly increased risk.
In three of eight cases, the Val/Val genotype was associated
with significantly increased ORs (Table 2). The meta-analysis with a
total of 754 cases and 1 563 controls showed significantly increased
ORs of 1.37 (1.09-1.71), 2.52 (1.62-3.91) and 1.44 (1.17-1.78) for Ile-Val
and Val/Val genotypes and the combined group, respectively.
There was no heterogeneity across the studies, so that the results
for the fixed-effect model were the same as for the random-effect
model for CYP1A1 exon 7 Ile-Val substitution. In contrast, no
significantly increased risk of esophageal cancer was observed for
the CYP1A1 MspI polymorphism.
Table 2
(PDF) Summary
of the meta-analysis of CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTP1 and esophageal cancer
risk
For CYP2E1, two out of five investigations
suggested that the c2 allele may significantly decrease the
risk with adjusted ORs (95%CI) of 0.31 (0.24-0.40) and 0.21
(0.08-0.56) for the homozygous and combined group, respectively. The
meta-analysis showed non-significantly decreased ORs for the c1/c2
and combined group (Table 2). For GSTPP1, one of seven showed
significantly increased risk with ORs (95%CI) of 3.44 (1.47-8.55),
3.65 (0.56-16.82) and 3.47 (1.51-8.46) for the hetero, homo and
combined group, respectively, while one indicated an opposite
association. Another study showed a marginally increased OR for the
hetero of 2.5 (1.0-6.3) but the meta-analysis generated a null
result (Table 2). For GSTM1, 3 of 12 studies showed the null
type to significantly increase the risk but the meta-analysis failed
to confirm this result (Table 3). For GSTT1, all the studies
were homogenous and both the fixed-effect and random-effect models
generated the same result. All the studies and the meta-analysis
found no relationship between this gene polymorphism and risk of
esophageal cancer (Table 3).
We also examined publication bias for each
polymorphism and only the GSTM1 polymorphism showed a
significant existence. Regarding CYP1A1 Ile-Val, the test was
far from statistically significant. In addition, the source of
heterogeneity was examined by meta-regression analysis for potential
factors such as Asian and Chinese population, publication year,
study design, and matching. No obvious source of heterogeneity was
identified except studies in Asian populations for the GSTP1
polymorphism (Table 4).
Table 3
Summary of the meta-analysis of GSTM1, GSTTI and esophageal
cancer risk
| Study |
Country |
Cases |
Controls |
Case |
Case |
Control |
Control |
OR
(95%CI) |
| GSTM1: |
|
|
|
Non-null |
Null |
Non-null |
Null |
|
| Hori
H |
Japan |
94 |
428 |
53 |
41 |
232 |
196 |
0.92
(0.57-1.47) |
| Nimura
Y |
China |
89 |
137 |
42 |
47 |
74 |
63 |
1.31
(0.74-2.32) |
| Morita
S |
Japan |
53 |
132 |
30 |
23 |
77 |
55 |
1.1
(0.6-2.0) |
| Lin
DX |
China |
45 |
45 |
25 |
20 |
24 |
21 |
1.0
(0.4-2.3)3 |
| van
Lieshout EM |
Netherlands |
34 |
247 |
17 |
17 |
119 |
128 |
0.93
(0.42-2.04) |
| Shao
G |
China |
107 |
111 |
68 |
39 |
56 |
55 |
1.76
(1.03-2.74) |
| Tan
W |
China |
150 |
150 |
104 |
46 |
74 |
76 |
0.43
(0.33-0.56)3,4 |
| Yokoyama
A |
Japan |
234 |
634 |
131 |
103 |
313 |
321 |
0.77
(0.56-1.05) |
| Gao
CM |
China |
141 |
223 |
35 |
106 |
90 |
133 |
2.17
(1.35-3.50)3 |
| Wang
LD |
China |
62 |
38 |
35 |
27 |
19 |
19 |
0.77
(0.32-1.88) |
| Casson
AG |
Canada |
45 |
45 |
19 |
26 |
20 |
25 |
1.1
(0.5-2.7)3 |
| Wang
AH |
China |
127 |
101 |
53 |
74 |
57 |
44 |
1.81
(1.03-3.18) |
| Meta-analysis |
results |
1
181 |
2
291 |
612 |
569 |
1
155 |
1
136 |
1.07
(0.76-1.51) |
| GSTT1: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Lin
DX |
China |
45 |
45 |
26 |
19 |
22 |
23 |
0.7
(0.3-1.5)3 |
| van
Lieshout EM |
Netherlands |
34 |
247 |
28 |
6 |
198 |
49 |
0.87
(0.28-2.29) |
| Tan
W |
China |
150 |
150 |
90 |
60 |
91 |
59 |
1.11
(0.83-1.43)3,4 |
| Gao
CM |
China |
141 |
223 |
67 |
74 |
104 |
119 |
0.90
(0.59-1.39)3 |
| Wang
LD |
China |
62 |
38 |
28 |
34 |
18 |
20 |
1.09
(0.45-2.65) |
| Casson
AG |
Canada |
45 |
45 |
37 |
8 |
33 |
12 |
0.6
(0.2-1.7)3 |
| Meta-analysis
results |
|
477 |
748 |
276 |
201 |
466 |
282 |
0.99
(0.80-1.22) |
1Non-null
genotype as the reference group. 2All
the ORs were crude values calculated from the genotype distribution
except in places denoted by3,
4. 3indicates
cases where the adjusted OR in the report was used and 4where
the OR value was inverted.
Table
4 Results of meta-regression
analysis and Egger�s test for publication bias
| |
|
|
Results
of meta-regression test |
| |
Number
of studies |
Egger�s
test Forpublication
bias1
P |
Asian
Yes/no Coefficient3 |
Chinese
Yes/no Coefficient3 |
Publication
Year Coefficient3 |
Design
1 or 22
Coefficient3 |
Matching
Yes/no
Coefficient3 |
| CYP1A1
Ile-Val |
8 |
0.96 |
-0.1 |
0.19 |
0.11 |
-0.2 |
-0.22 |
| CYP1A1
MspI |
5 |
0.96 |
-0.42 |
-0.67 |
-0.9 |
0.01 |
-0.01 |
| CYP2E
RsaI |
5 |
0.32 |
1 |
-0.89 |
0.76 |
1.3 |
-0.13 |
| GSTM1 |
12 |
0.04 |
0.06 |
0.21 |
0.25 |
-0.34 |
-0.16 |
| GSTT1 |
6 |
0.11 |
0.34 |
0.34 |
-0.16 |
0.37 |
0.16 |
| GSTP1 |
7 |
0.99 |
-1.254 |
-0.07 |
0.88 |
0.4 |
0.02 |
1P-value
of Egger�s test for publication bias. 2Study
design: 1: population-based case-control study, 2: hospital-based
case-control study. 3Coefficient
in the meta-regression analysis indicates the summary OR change in
the value for that factor. For example, the OR for studies examining
CYP1A1 Ile-Val polymorphism only among Asian population is the value
of (summary OR�0.1). 4Indicates
statistical significance at the level of P<0.10.
DISCUSSION
In this systematic review, we found a significant association
between the CYP1A1 Ile-Val polymorphism and the risk of
esophageal cancer, while failing to detect links with other gene
polymorphisms examined.
The CYPs superfamily, which plays a central part
in the metabolism of carcinogens through activating oxidation
reactions, may be expressed in esophageal mucosa[16-18].
The CYP1A1 Ile-Val substitution in exon 7 results in a
two-fold increase in microsomal enzyme activity[2]
and therefore the Val allele would be expected to increase
the susceptibility to esophageal cancer. In fact, our results are in
line with eight of the studies previously published, although five
of them failed to find a significant association, possibly because
of small sample sizes (Table 2). One meta-(OR for Val/Val
genotype, 1.62 (0.93-2.82)) and one pooled analysis (OR for Val/Val
genotype, 1.54 (0.97-1.46)) of lung cancers and another of head and
neck cancer (OR for Val/Val type, 1.35 (0.95-1.82)) also
showed that the CYP1A1 Val allele may increase cancer risk,
although this was not significant[54-56].
MspI polymorphisms in the 3�-flanking region of the CYP1A1
are completely linked with the Ile-Val substitution in exon 7 in
Caucasians, which has also been associated experimentally with
increased catalytic activity[2].
However, this complete linkage between MspI and Ile-Val
substitution could not been found in Asian population[41,49].
The previous five studies on this polymorphism and esophageal cancer
risk showed different results. Only one study in Caucasians showed
the MspI non-wild allele, which was completely linked with
the Val allele in control group to significantly increase the
risk of esophageal cancer (Table 2). The meta-analysis showed no
significance with ORs around unity (Table 2). This may be because
the MspI polymorphism itself does not alter activity of the CYP1A1
enzyme. Increased enzyme activity[2]
and susceptibility to esophageal cancer[45]
in Caucasians may be because of the high association between the MspI
polymorphism and the Ile-Val substitution in exon 7. This should be
clarified in further studies.
In contrast to CYP1A1, no association was
found in the present meta-analysis with the CYP2E1 c2 allele.
CYP2E1 is primarily responsible for metabolic activation of
many low molecular weight carcinogens[3],
including certain nitrosamines, which may be involved in
carcinogenesis of the esophagus. The variant c2 allele
appears to be associated with decreased enzyme activity[5].
Possible explanations for the lack of any association found here
include (1) a small number of studies, (2) greater influence of
other polymorphisms in CYP2E1 such as Dral and tandem
repeat polymorphisms and (3) difference in exposure level to
xenobiotics across the study populations. These issues must be
considered in future investigations.
We also failed to find any association with GST
gene polymorphisms. GSTM1 and GSTT1 null type cannot
encode functional enzymes and therefore affected individuals would
be expected to be more vulnerable to carcinogens. The GSTP1 Ile104Val
substitution may also change the enzyme activity of GSTP1 and
modulate susceptibility. A meta- and pooled analyses on head and
neck cancer showed GSTM1 (OR = 1.32, 95%CI, 1.07-1.62) and GSTT1
(OR = 1.25, 95%CI, 1.00-1.57) to modestly increase susceptibility[54],
but most previous studies on esophageal cancer and our meta-analysis
failed to find any relationship. Possible explanations include (1)
significance of these enzymes may vary with the cancer site; (2)
GSTs metabolize a variety of xenobiotics with a large overlap in the
substrate specificity and individuals lacking only one functional
enzyme also can metabolize the carcinogens by other GST enzymes; and
(3) publication bias may exist together with heterogeneity across
studies, which may decrease the statistical power.
As is often the case with meta-analyses, there
were several limitations to the present study. Possible sources of
heterog-eneity, such as differences in study design, publication
year and countries/ethnicities, must be considered although
meta-regression did not demonstrate the existence of any significant
variation except in ethnicity for GSTP1. Possible publication
bias is another threat for our summary ORs, although it was detected
only for GSTM1. In addition, as adjusted ORs are much more
accurate than crude ORs but not available for certain studies, and
adjusted and matching factors differed across the studies, residual
confounding might have influenced our analysis. Finally,
literature-based meta-analysis rather than individual data-based
meta-analysis could be a potential source of bias.
In conclusion, we found here a significant
association between the CYP1A1 Ile-Val polymorphism and the
risk of esophageal cancer by systematic review. Harboring the Val
allele, expected to increase the internal exposure to activated
carcinogens, thus appears to elevate the risk of esophageal cancer.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The first author, Chun-Xia Yang, was the recipient of a �Special
Japan-China Sasakawa Medical Fellowship� during the period of
research for and compilation of this paper.
REFERENCES
1 Bartsch
H, Nair U, Risch A, Rojas M, Wikman H, Alexandrov K. Genetic
polymorphism of CYP genes, alone or
in combination, as a risk modifier of
tobacco-related cancers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000;
9: 3-28
2 Landi
MT, Bertazzi PA, Shields PG, Clark G, Lucier GW, Garte SJ, Cosma
G, Caporaso NE. Association between
CYP1A1 genotype, mRNA expression and
enzymatic activity in humans. Pharmacogenetics 1994; 4:
242-246
3 Yang
CS, Yoo JS, Ishizaki H, Hong JY. Cytochrome P450IIE1: roles in
nitrosamine metabolism and mechanisms
of regulation. Drug Metab Rev 1990;
22: 147-159
4 Albano
E, Tomasi A, Persson JO, Terelius Y, Goria-Gatti L,
Ingelman-Sundberg M. Role of ethanol-inducible
cytochrome P450 (P450IIE1) in
catalysing the free radical activation of aliphatic alcohols. Biochem
Pharmacol 1991;
41: 1895-1902
5 Marchand
LL, Wilkinson GR, Wilkens LR. Genetic and dietary predictors of
CYP2E1 activity: a phenotyping study in
Hawaii Japanese using chlorzoxazone. Cancer
Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999; 8: 495-500
6 Pemble
S, Schroeder KR, Spencer SR, Meyer DJ, Hallier E, Bolt HM,
Ketterer B, Taylor JB. Human
glutathione S-transferase theta
(GSTT1): cDNA cloning and the characterization of a genetic
polymorphism. Biochem
J 1994; 300:
271-276
7 Strange
RC, Fryer AA. The glutathione S-transferases: influence of
polymorphism on cancer susceptibility. IARC Sci
Publ 1999; 148:
231-249
8 Nakajima
T, Wang RS, Nimura Y, Pin YM, He M, Vainio H, Murayama N, Aoyama
T, Iida F. Expression of
cytochrome P450s and glutathione S-transferases
in human esophagus with squamous-cell carcinomas.
Carcinogenesis 1996; 17:
1477-1481
9 Berhane
K, Widersten M, Engstrom A, Kozarich JW, Mannervik B.
Detoxication of base propenals and other
alpha, beta-unsaturated aldehyde
products of radical reactions and lipid peroxidation by human
glutathione
transferases. Proc Natl Acad Sci
USA 1994; 91: 1480-1484
10 Harries
LW, Stubbins MJ, Forman D, Howard GC, Wolf CR. Identification of
genetic polymorphisms at the
glutathione S-transferase Pi
locus and association with susceptibility to bladder, testicular and
prostate
cancer. Carcinogenesis 1997;
18: 641-644
11
Ryberg
D, Skaug V, Hewer A, Phillips DH, Harries LW, Wolf CR, Ogreid D,
Ulvik A, Vu P, Haugen A. Genotypes
of glutathione transferase M1
and P1 and their significance for lung DNA adduct levels and cancer
risk.
Carcinogenesis 1997;
18: 1285-1289
12 Xing
D, Tan W, Lin D. Genetic polymorphisms and susceptibility to
esophageal cancer among Chinese
population (review). Oncol
Rep 2003; 10: 1615-1623
13 Ribeiro
Pinto LF, Teixeira Rossini AM, Albano RM, Felzenszwalb I, de
Moura Gallo CV, Nunes RA , Andreollo
NA. Mechanisms of esophageal
cancer development in Brazilians. Mutat Res 2003; 544:
365-373
14 Zhang
Z, Bian J. Progress in research on the relationship between
genetic polymorphisms of
alcohol-metabolizing enzymes
and cancers. Zhonghua Yixue Yichuanxue Zazhi 2001; 18:
62-65
15 Wargovich
MJ. Experimental evidence for cancer preventive elements in
foods. Cancer Lett 1997; 114: 11-17
16 Godoy
W, Albano RM, Moraes EG, Pinho PR, Nunes RA, Saito EH, Higa C,
Filho IM, Kruel CD, Schirmer
CC, Gurski R, Lang MA, Pinto
LF. CYP2A6/2A7 and CYP2E1 expression in human oesophageal mucosa:
regional
and inter-individual variation
in expression and relevance to nitrosamine metabolism. Carcinogenesis
2002; 23: 611-616
17 Murray
GI, Shaw D, Weaver RJ, McKay JA, Ewen SW, Melvin WT, Burke MD.
Cytochrome P450 expression
in oesophageal cancer. Gut
1994; 35: 599-603
18 Lechevrel
M, Casson AG, Wolf CR, Hardie LJ, Flinterman MB, Montesano R,
Wild CP. Characterization of
cytochrome P450 expression in
human oesophageal mucosa. Carcinogenesis 1999; 20:
243-248
19 Maliakal
PP, Coville PF, Wanwimolruk S. Decreased hepatic drug
metabolising enzyme activity in rats
with nitrosamine-induced
tumours. Drug Metabol Drug Interact 2002; 19: 13-27
20 Mori
Y, Koide A, Kobayashi Y, Morimura K, Kaneko M, Fukushima S.
Effect of ethanol treatment on metabolic
activation and detoxification
of esophagus carcinogenic N-nitrosamines in rat liver. Mutagenesis
2002; 17: 251-256
21 Chen
SC, Wang X, Xu G, Zhou L, Vennerstrom JL, Gonzalez F, Gelboin HV,
Mirvish SS. Depentylation
of
[3H-pentyl]methyl-n-amylnitrosamine by rat esophageal and liver
microsomes and by rat and human cytochrome
P450 isoforms. Cancer Res 1999;
59: 91-98
22 Lechevrel
M, Wild CP. Absence of a differential induction of cytochrome
P450 2E1 by different alcoholic beverages
in rats: implications for the
aetiology of human oesophageal cancer. Arch Toxicol 1997; 71:
690-695
23 Kato
S, Shields PG, Caporaso NE, Hoover RN, Trump BF, Sugimura H,
Weston A, Harris CC. Cytochrome
P450IIE1 genetic polymorphisms,
racial variation, and lung cancer risk. Cancer Res 1992; 52:
6712-6715
24 Adams
CH, Werely CJ, Victor TC, Hoal EG, Rossouw G, van Helden PD.
Allele frequencies for glutathione
S-transferase and N-acetyltransferase
2 differ in African population groups and may be associated
with
oesophageal cancer or
tuberculosis incidence. Clin Chem Lab Med 2003; 41:
600-605
25 Sepehr
A, Kamangar F, Abnet CC, Fahimi S, Pourshams A, Poustchi H,
Zeinali S, Sotoudeh M, Islami F,
Nasrollahzadeh D, Malekzadeh R,
Taylor PR, Dawsey SM. Genetic polymorphisms in three Iranian
populations
with different risks of
esophageal cancer, an ecologic comparison. Cancer Lett 2004; 213:
195-202
26 Morse
MA, Lu J, Stoner GD, Murphy SE, Peterson LA. Metabolism of N-nitrosobenzylmethylamine
by human
cytochrome P-450 enzymes. J
Toxicol Environ Health A 1999; 58: 397-411
27 Nishimoto
IN, Hanaoka T, Sugimura H, Nagura K, Ihara M, Li XJ, Arai T,
Hamada GS, Kowalski LP, Tsugane
S. Cytochrome P450 2E1
polymorphism in gastric cancer in Brazil: case-control studies of
Japanese Brazilians
and non-Japanese Brazilians. Cancer
Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000; 9: 675-680
28 Carstensen
U, Alexandrie AK, Hogstedt B, Rannug A, Bratt I, Hagmar L. B-
and T-lymphocyte micronuclei in
chimney sweeps with respect to
genetic polymorphism for CYP1A1 and GST1 (class Mu). Mutat Res 1993;
289: 187-195
29 Nomura
F, Itoga S, Uchimoto T, Tomonaga T, Nezu M, Shimada H, Ochiai T.
Transcriptional activity of the
tandem repeat polymorphism in
the 5'-flanking region of the human CYP2E1 gene. Alcohol Clin Exp
Res 2003;
27: 42S-46S
30 Xing
D, Song N, Tan W. Detection of malondialdehyde-DNA adduct level
by 32P-postlabeling assay in normal
human esophageal epithelium and
esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Zhonghua Zhongliu Zazhi 2001;
23: 473-476
31 Eads
CA, Lord RV, Wickramasinghe K, Long TI, Kurumboor SK, Bernstein
L, Peters JH, DeMeester SR, DeMeester
TR, Skinner KA, Laird PW.
Epigenetic patterns in the progression of esophageal adenocarcinoma.
Cancer Res 2001;
61: 3410-3418
32 Tanabe
H, Ohhira M, Ohtsubo T, Watari J, Yokota K, Kohgo Y. Genetic
polymorphism of aldehyde dehydrogenase
2 in patients with upper
aerodigestive tract cancer. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1999; 23:
17S-20S
33 Lin D,
Tang Y, Peng Q. Genetic polymorphisms of cytochrome P450 2E1 and
glutathione S-transferase P1
and susceptibility to
esophageal cancer. Zhonghua Zhongliu Zazhi 1998; 20:
94-97
34 Lin D,
Tang Y, Lu S. Glutathione S-transferase M1, T1 genotypes and the
risk of esophageal cancer: a
case-control study. Zhonghua
Liuxingbingxue Zazhi 1998; 19: 195-199
35 Wang
AH, Sun CS, Li LS, Huang JY, Chen QS. Relationship of tobacco
smoking CYP1A1 GSTM1 gene polymorphism
and esophageal cancer in
Xi�an. World J Gastroenterol 2002; 8: 49-53
36 Lin
DX, Tang YM, Peng Q, Lu SX, Ambrosone CB, Kadlubar FF.
Susceptibility to esophageal cancer and
genetic polymorphisms in
glutathione S-transferases T1, P1, and M1 and cytochrome P450 2E1. Cancer
Epidemiol Biomarkers
Prev 1998; 7: 1013-1018
37
Roth
MJ, Dawsey SM, Wang G, Tangrea JA, Zhou B, Ratnasinghe D,
Woodson KG, Olivero OA, Poirier MC, Frye
BL, Taylor PR, Weston A.
Association between GSTM1*0 and squamous dysplasia of the esophagus
in the high
risk region of Linxian, China. Cancer
Lett 2000; 156: 73-81
38 Chao
YC, Wang LS, Hsieh TY, Chu CW, Chang FY, Chu HC. Chinese
alcoholic patients with esophageal cancer
are genetically different from
alcoholics with acute pancreatitis and liver cirrhosis. Am J
Gastroenterol 2000;
95: 2958-2964
39 Lucas
D, Menez C, Floch F, Gourlaouen Y, Sparfel O, Joannet I, Bodenez
P, Jezequel J, Gouerou H, Berthou F,
Bardou LG, Menez JF.
Cytochromes P4502E1 and P4501A1 genotypes and susceptibility to
cirrhosis or
upper aerodigestive tract
cancer in alcoholic Caucasians. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1996; 20:
1033-1037
40 Itoga
S, Nomura F, Makino Y, Tomonaga T, Shimada H, Ochiai T, Iizasa
T, Baba M, Fujisawa T, Harada S.
Tandem repeat polymorphism of
the CYP2E1 gene: an association study with esophageal cancer and
lung cancer.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2002;
26: 15S-19S
41 Hori
H, Kawano T, Endo M, Yuasa Y. Genetic polymorphisms of tobacco-
and alcohol-related metabolizing enzymes
and human esophageal squamous
cell carcinoma susceptibility. J Clin Gastroenterol 1997; 25:
568-575
42 Nimura
Y, Yokoyama S, Fujimori M, Aoki T, Adachi W, Nasu T, He M, Ping
YM, Iida F. Genotyping of the CYP1A1
and GSTM1 genes in esophageal
carcinoma patients with special reference to smoking. Cancer 1997;
80: 852-857
43 Morita
S, Yano M, Shiozaki H, Tsujinaka T, Ebisui C, Morimoto T,
Kishibuti M, Fujita J, Ogawa A, Taniguchi M, Inoue
M, Tamura S, Yamazaki K,
Kikkawa N, Mizunoya S, Monden M. CYP1A1, CYP2E1 and GSTM1
polymorphisms are
not associated with
susceptibility to squamous-cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Int J
Cancer 1997; 71: 192-195
44 Morita
S, Yano M, Tsujinaka T, Ogawa A, Taniguchi M, Kaneko K, Shiozaki
H, Doki Y, Inoue M, Monden M.
Association between genetic
polymorphisms of glutathione S-transferase P1 and N-acetyltransferase
2 and
susceptibility to squamous-cell
carcinoma of the esophagus. Int J Cancer 1998; 79:
517-520
45 van
Lieshout EM, Roelofs HM, Dekker S, Mulder CJ, Wobbes T, Jansen
JB, Peters WH. Polymorphic expression of
the glutathione S-transferase
P1 gene and its susceptibility to Barrett�s esophagus and
esophageal carcinoma.
Cancer Res 1999; 59:
586-589
46 Shao
G, Su Y, Huang G, Wen B. Relationship between CYP1A1, GSTM1
genetic polymorphisms and susceptibility
to esophageal squamous cell
carcinoma. Zhonghua Liuxing Bingxue Zazhi 2000; 21:
420-423
47 Lee
JM, Lee YC, Yang SY, Shi WL, Lee CJ, Luh SP, Chen CJ, Hsieh CY,
Wu MT. Genetic polymorphisms of p53
and GSTP1,but not NAT2, are
associated with susceptibility to squamous-cell carcinoma of the
esophagus. Int J
Cancer 2000; 89:
458-464
48 Tan W,
Song N, Wang GQ, Liu Q, Tang HJ, Kadlubar FF, Lin DX. Impact of
genetic polymorphisms in cytochrome
P450 2E1 and glutathione S-transferases
M1, T1, and P1 on susceptibility to esophageal cancer among
high-risk individuals in China.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000; 9: 551-556
49 Wu MT,
Lee JM, Wu DC, Ho CK, Wang YT, Lee YC, Hsu HK, Kao EL. Genetic
polymorphisms of cytochrome P4501A1
and oesophageal squamous-cell
carcinoma in Taiwan. Br J Cancer 2002; 87: 529-532
50 Gao C,
Takezaki T, Wu J, Li Z, Wang J, Ding J, Liu Y, Hu X, Xu T, Tajima K,
Sugimura H. Interaction between
cytochrome P-450 2E1
polymorphisms and environmental factors with risk of esophageal and
stomach cancers
in Chinese. Cancer Epidemiol
Biomarkers Prev 2002; 11: 29-34
51 Yokoyama
A, Kato H, Yokoyama T, Tsujinaka T, Muto M, Omori T, Haneda T,
Kumagai Y, Igaki H, Yokoyama
M, Watanabe H, Fukuda H,
Yoshimizu H. Genetic polymorphisms of alcohol and aldehyde
dehydrogenases and
glutathione S-transferase M1
and drinking, smoking, and diet in Japanese men with esophageal
squamous
cell carcinoma. Carcinogenesis
2002; 23: 1851-1859
52 Gao
CM, Takezaki T, Wu JZ, Li ZY, Liu YT, Li SP, Ding JH, Su P, Hu
X, Xu TL, Sugimura H, Tajima
K. Glutathione-S-transferases
M1 (GSTM1) and GSTT1 genotype, smoking, consumption of alcohol and
tea and risk
of esophageal and stomach
cancers: a case-control study of a high-incidence area in Jiangsu
Province, China.
Cancer Lett 2002; 188:
95-102
53 Casson
AG, Zheng Z, Chiasson D, MacDonald K, Riddell DC, Guernsey JR,
Guernsey DL, McLaughlin J.
Associations between genetic
polymorphisms of Phase I and II metabolizing enzymes, p53 and
susceptibility
to esophageal adenocar-cinoma. Cancer
Detect Prev 2003; 27: 139-146
54 Hashibe
M, Brennan P, Strange RC, Bhisey R, Cascorbi I, Lazarus P, Oude
Ophuis MB, Benhamou S, Foulkes WD,
Katoh T, Coutelle C, Romkes M,
Gaspari L, Taioli E, Boffetta P. Meta- and pooled analyses of GSTM1,
GSTT1, GSTP1,
and CYP1A1 genotypes and risk
of head and neck cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;
12: 1509-1517
55 Houlston
RS. CYP1A1 polymorphisms and lung cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Pharmacogenetics
2000; 10: 105-114
56 Le
Marchand L, Guo C, Benhamou S, Bouchardy C, Cascorbi I, Clapper
ML, Garte S, Haugen A, Ingelman-Sundberg
M, Kihara M, Rannug A, Ryberg
D, Stucker I, Sugimura H, Taioli E. Pooled analysis of the CYP1A1
exon 7
polymorphism and lung cancer
(United States). Cancer Causes Control 2003; 14:
339-346
Science
Editor Guo SY Language
Editor Elsevier HK
| |