Previous studies evaluating the association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk reported conflicting findings. We searched PubMed and Embase databases up to May 16, 2013 to identify eligible studies on the association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk. Finally, a total of seven case–control studies including 3,971 cases of cutaneous melanoma and 5,873 controls were included in the meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed with STATA version 11.0. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) were used to assess the strength of the association. Overall, there was no association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk under all five genetic models (Gln vs. Lys: OR = 1.11, 95 % CI = 0.98–1.26, P = 0.10; GlnGln vs. LysLys: OR = 1.26, 95 % CI = 0.98–1.61, P = 0.07; LysGln vs. LysLys: OR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 0.88–1.22, P = 0.64; GlnGln/LysGln vs. LysLys: OR = 1.10, 95 % CI = 0.92–1.31, P = 0.29; GlnGln vs. LysLys/LysGln: OR = 1.19, 95 % CI = 0.99–1.43, P = 0.06). Subgroup analysis in Caucasians showed that there was an obvious association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk in Caucasians (GlnGln vs. LysLys/LysGln: OR = 1.12, 95 % CI = 1.00–1.25, P = 0.05). Sensitivity analysis by omitting one study in turns showed that the significance of the pooled ORs was not stable. In addition, there was some evidence of publication bias in the meta-analysis, and meta-analyses of the studies with large sample size did not find the obvious association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk in Caucasians. Therefore, there is little evidence for the association between XPC Lys939Gln polymorphism and cutaneous melanoma risk.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Rager EL, Bridgeford EP, Ollila DW. Cutaneous melanoma: update on prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2005;72:269–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wolff T, Tai E, Miller T. Screening for skin cancer: an update of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:194–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean E, Lorigan P. Advances in the management of melanoma: targeted therapy, immunotherapy and future directions. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2012;12:1437–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zalaudek I, Whiteman D, Rosendahl C, Menzies SW, Green AC, Hersey P, et al. Update on melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer. Annual skin cancer conference 2011, Hamilton Island, Australia, 5–6 August 2011. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2011;11:1829–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griewank KG, Ugurel S, Schadendorf D, Paschen A. New developments in biomarkers for melanoma. Curr Opin Oncol. 2013;25:145–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng W, Cong XF, Cai WH, Yang S, Mao C, Zou HW. Current evidences on xpc polymorphisms and breast cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;128:811–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang Y, Wang X, Zhang W, Gong S. An association between xpc lys939gln polymorphism and the risk of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. Tumour Biol. 2013;34:973–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu C, Yin Q, Hu J, Li L, Zhang Y, Wang Y. A meta-analysis of evidences on xpc polymorphisms and lung cancer susceptibility. Tumour Biol. 2013;34:1205–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blankenburg S, Konig IR, Moessner R, Laspe P, Thoms KM, Krueger U, et al. Assessment of 3 xeroderma pigmentosum group c gene polymorphisms and risk of cutaneous melanoma: a case-control study. Carcinogenesis. 2005;26:1085–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li C, Hu Z, Liu Z, Wang LE, Strom SS, Gershenwald JE, et al. Polymorphisms in the DNA repair genes xpc, xpd, and xpg and risk of cutaneous melanoma: a case-control analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:2526–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millikan RC, Hummer A, Begg C, Player J, de Cotret AR, Winkel S, et al. Polymorphisms in nucleotide excision repair genes and risk of multiple primary melanoma: the genes environment and melanoma study. Carcinogenesis. 2006;27:610–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goncalves FT, Francisco G, de Souza SP, Luiz OC, Festa-Neto C, Sanches JA, et al. European ancestry and polymorphisms in DNA repair genes modify the risk of melanoma: a case-control study in a high uv index region in brazil. J Dermatol Sci. 2011;64:59–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira C, Rinck-Junior JA, Lourenco GJ, Moraes AM, Lima CS. Assessment of the xpc (a2920c), xpf (t30028c), tp53 (arg72pro) and gstp1 (ile105val) polymorphisms in the risk of cutaneous melanoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139:1199–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paszkowska-Szczur K, Scott RJ, Serrano-Fernandez P, Mirecka A, Gapska P, Gorski B, et al. Xeroderma pigmentosum genes and melanoma risk. Int J Cancer. 2013;133:1094–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres SM, Luo L, Lilyquist J, Stidley CA, Flores K, White KA, et al. DNA repair variants, indoor tanning, and risk of melanoma. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2013;26(5):677–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar