Advertisement

Tumor Biology

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 3035–3039 | Cite as

Quantitative assessment of the association between three polymorphisms in FAS and FASL gene and breast cancer risk

  • Zexing Wang
  • Jun Gu
  • Weiwei Nie
  • Jing Xu
  • Guichun Huang
  • Xiaoxiang Guan
Research Article

Abstract

FAS and FAS ligand (FASL) play crucial roles in apoptotic signaling, and deregulation of this pathway may facilitate carcinogenesis. Studies on the association between the FAS/FASL polymorphisms (FAS-1377G/A rs2234767, FAS-670A/G rs1800682, and FASL-844C/T rs763110) and breast cancer risk have reported inconsistent results. Therefore, to characterize the relationship between those polymorphisms and breast cancer risk, we undertook a meta-analysis of those studies. Several electronic databases were searched for articles on the FAS/FASL polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. The genotype data were extracted; pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate the strength of the association. Five studies were eligible for our meta-analysis. Overall, we observed significant associations of the FAS-1377G/A polymorphism with breast cancer susceptibility (AG vs. GG: OR = 1.15, 95 % CI 1.02–1.30; AA vs. GG: OR = 1.39, 95 % CI 1.12–1.72; AG/AA vs. GG: OR = 1.18, 95 % CI, 1.16–1.32; A vs. G: OR = 1.16, 95 % CI 1.06–1.26), but we did not observe significant association of the Fas-670A/G and FasL-844C/T polymorphisms with breast cancer risk. In the subgroup analysis, we observed that the FAS-1377G/A and FASL-844C/T polymorphisms were associated with breast cancer risk in Chinese but not Whites; we still did not observed association of the FAS-670A/G polymorphism with breast cancer risk. Our meta-analysis revealed that FAS-1377G>A polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. FASL-844C>T polymorphism might be associated with a reduced breast cancer risk in Chinese. However, FAS-670A/G had no any effect on breast carcinogenesis.

Keywords

FAS FASL Polymorphisms Breast cancer Risk 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project is supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81272252) and Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK2011656).

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Forouzanfar MH, Foreman KJ, Delossantos AM, Lozano R, Lopez AD, Murray CJ, et al. Breast and cervical cancer in 187 countries between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2011;378(9801):1461–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Evan GI, Vousden KH. Proliferation, cell cycle and apoptosis in cancer. Nature. 2001;411(6835):342–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Niehans GA, Brunner T, Frizelle SP, Liston JC, Salerno CT, Knapp DJ, et al. Human lung carcinomas express Fas ligand. Cancer Res. 1997;57(6):1007–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reimer T, Herrnring C, Koczan D, Richter D, Gerber B, Kabelitz D, et al. FasL:Fas ratio – a prognostic factor in breast carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2000;60(4):822–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mottolese M, Buglioni S, Bracalenti C, Cardarelli MA, Ciabocco L, Giannarelli D, et al. Prognostic relevance of altered Fas (CD95)-system in human breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2000;89(2):127–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sibley K, Rollinson S, Allan JM, Smith AG, Law GR, Roddam PL, et al. Functional FAS promoter polymorphisms are associated with increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Res. 2003;63(15):4327–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanemitsu S, Ihara K, Saifddin A, Otsuka T, Takeuchi T, Nagayama J, et al. A functional polymorphism in fas (CD95/APO-1) gene promoter associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2002;29(6):1183–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hashemi M, Fazaeli A, Ghavami S, Eskandari-Nasab E, Arbabi F, Mashhadi MA, et al. Functional polymorphisms of FAS and FASL gene and risk of breast cancer – pilot study of 134 cases. PloS ONE. 2013;8(1):11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang W, Zheng Z, Yu W, Lin H, Cui B, Cao F. Polymorphisms of the FAS and FASL genes and risk of breast cancer. Oncol Lett. 2012;3(3):625–8.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang B, Sun T, Xue L, Han X, Lu N, Shi Y, et al. Functional polymorphisms in FAS and FASL contribute to increased apoptosis of tumor infiltration lymphocytes and risk of breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2007;28(5):1067–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crew KD, Gammon MD, Terry MB, Zhang FF, Agrawal M, Eng SM, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in the apoptosis-associated genes FAS and FASL and breast cancer risk. Carcinogenesis. 2007;28(12):2548–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krippl P, Langsenlehner U, Renner W, Koppel H, Samonigg H. Re: Polymorphisms of death pathway genes FAS and FASL in esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 Oct 6;96(19):1478–9; author reply 1479Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berry KJ, Johnston JE, Mielke Jr PW. An alternative measure of effect size for Cochran’s Q test for related proportions. Percept Mot Skills. 2007;104(3 Pt 2):1236–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22(4):719–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gutierrez LS, Eliza M, Niven-Fairchild T, Naftolin F, Mor G. The Fas/Fas-ligand system: a mechanism for immune evasion in human breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1999;54(3):245–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maher S, Toomey D, Condron C, Bouchier-Hayes D. Activation-induced cell death: the controversial role of Fas and Fas ligand in immune privilege and tumour counterattack. Immunol Cell Biol. 2002;80(2):131–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ju ST, Panka DJ, Cui H, Ettinger R. el-Khatib M, Sherr DH et al. Fas(CD95)/FasL interactions required for programmed cell death after T-cell activation. Nature. 1995;373(6513):444–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tian J, Pan F, Li J, Ma Y, Cen H, Pan HF, et al. Association between the FAS/FASL polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13(3):945–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang Z, Xue H, Gong W, Wang M, Yuan L, Han S. FAS promoter polymorphisms and cancer risk: a meta-analysis based on 34 case–control studies. Carcinogenesis. 2009;30(3):487–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wu J, Metz C, Xu X, Abe R, Gibson AW, Edberg JC, et al. A novel polymorphic CAAT/enhancer-binding protein beta element in the FasL gene promoter alters Fas ligand expression: a candidate background gene in African American systemic lupus erythematosus patients. J Immunol. 2003;170(1):132–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zexing Wang
    • 1
  • Jun Gu
    • 2
  • Weiwei Nie
    • 3
  • Jing Xu
    • 1
  • Guichun Huang
    • 1
  • Xiaoxiang Guan
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Medical Oncology, Jinling HospitalMedical School of Nanjing UniversityNanjingPeoples Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of General Surgery, Jinling HospitalMedical School of Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.Department of Medical Oncology, Jinling Hospital, School of MedicineSouthern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations