Original Article
Impact of the PARP1 rs1136410 and rs3219145 polymorphisms on susceptibility and clinicopathologic features of breast cancer in a Chinese population
Abstract
Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP1) is the important one in the PARP family. PARP1 participates in the development of tumors and its polymorphisms were reported to relate to various tumors risk. The case-control study aimed to examine whether the PARP1 rs1136410 and rs3219145 polymorphisms had an association with breast cancer (BC) risk in a Chinese population.
Methods: We used the Sequenom MassARRAY to genotype the two polymorphisms in this study. We used SPSS 18.0 for statistical analyses and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for evaluating the strength of association between the two polymorphisms and the susceptibility to BC. The associations between thePARP1 genotypes of the polymorphisms and patients’ clinical characteristics were estimated by the χ2-test and ORs and 95% CIs. The allele frequencies were assessed whether they deviated from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) using the χ2-test before analysis.
Results: There were significantly different between the genotype distributions of cases and controls for the PARP1 rs1136410 polymorphism under the dominant (P=0.022, adjusted OR =0.73), recessive (P=0.028, adjusted OR =0.69) and allele models (P=0.005), the C/C genotype had a lower BC risk. Notably, this polymorphism exerted a more protective effect in the subgroup of older subjects (age ≥49 years) (P=0.003). The relationship of rs1136410 C/C genotype and less frequent lymph node involvement (OR =0.60, 95% CI: 0.37–0.99), less venous invasion (OR =0.55, 95% CI: 0.31–0.95), and lower Ki67 expression (OR =0.58, 95% CI: 0.35–0.96) was also observed. However, we did not observe any significant results with the PARP1 rs3219145 polymorphism.
Conclusions: Our results suggest that the PARP1 rs1136410 polymorphism may reduce the BC risk and delay BC progression rather than the rs3219145 polymorphism in the Chinese population.
Methods: We used the Sequenom MassARRAY to genotype the two polymorphisms in this study. We used SPSS 18.0 for statistical analyses and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for evaluating the strength of association between the two polymorphisms and the susceptibility to BC. The associations between thePARP1 genotypes of the polymorphisms and patients’ clinical characteristics were estimated by the χ2-test and ORs and 95% CIs. The allele frequencies were assessed whether they deviated from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) using the χ2-test before analysis.
Results: There were significantly different between the genotype distributions of cases and controls for the PARP1 rs1136410 polymorphism under the dominant (P=0.022, adjusted OR =0.73), recessive (P=0.028, adjusted OR =0.69) and allele models (P=0.005), the C/C genotype had a lower BC risk. Notably, this polymorphism exerted a more protective effect in the subgroup of older subjects (age ≥49 years) (P=0.003). The relationship of rs1136410 C/C genotype and less frequent lymph node involvement (OR =0.60, 95% CI: 0.37–0.99), less venous invasion (OR =0.55, 95% CI: 0.31–0.95), and lower Ki67 expression (OR =0.58, 95% CI: 0.35–0.96) was also observed. However, we did not observe any significant results with the PARP1 rs3219145 polymorphism.
Conclusions: Our results suggest that the PARP1 rs1136410 polymorphism may reduce the BC risk and delay BC progression rather than the rs3219145 polymorphism in the Chinese population.
