Search Article Keyword  
PubMed Submission Abstarct PDF Cited  Click Count: 1860 DownLoad Count: 901 

ISSN 1007-9327 CN 14-1219/R  World J Gastroenterol  2005 May 7;11(17):2531-2538

Phase I/II enzyme gene polymorphisms and esophageal cancer risk: A meta-analysis of the literature

Chun-Xia Yang, Keitaro Matsuo, Zhi-Ming Wang, Kazuo Tajima


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
bias
1  P    
Asian  Yes/no  Coefficient3   Chinese  Yes/no  Coefficient3   Publication  Year  Coefficient3   Design  1 or 22  Coefficient3   Matching  Yes/no
Coefficient
3
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

 

Reviews Add
more>>


Related Articles:
VEGF165 antisense RNA suppresses oncogenic properties of human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Nitric oxide and calcium ions in apoptotic esophageal carcinoma cells induced by arsenite
Morphological and functional changes of mitochondria in apoptotic esophageal carcinoma cells induced by arsenic trioxide
Field Population-based blocking treatment of esophageal epithelia dysplasia
Identification of differentially expressed proteins between human esophageal immortalized and carcinomatous cell lines by two-dimensional electrophoresis and MALDI-TOF-mass spectrometry
more>>