Glucose Transporter 1 Gene Variants Predict the Prognosis of Patients with Early-Stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
- 166 Downloads
This study was conducted to investigate whether polymorphisms of glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1) gene are associated with the prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after surgical resection.
Five single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in GLUT1 were investigated in a total of 354 patients with NSCLC who underwent curative surgery. The association of the SNPs with patients’ survival was analyzed.
Among the five SNPs investigated, two SNPs (GLUT1 rs3820589T > A and rs4658G > C) were significantly associated with OS in multivariate analyses. GLUT1 rs3820589T > A was associated with significantly better OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.34–0.94, P = 0.03, under dominant model), and rs4658G > C was associated with significantly worse OS (aHR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.09–3.33, P = 0.02, under recessive model). In the stratified analysis by tumor histology, the effect of these SNPs on OS was only significant in squamous cell carcinoma but not in adenocarcinoma. When the two SNPs were combined, OS decreased as the number of bad genotypes increased (Ptrend = 4 × 10−3).
This study suggests that genetic variation in GLUT1 may be useful in predicting survival of patients with early stage NSCLC.
This study was supported in part by the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (1720040), and in part by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (NRF-2016R1A1A1A05005315).
The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.
- 17.Starska K, Forma E, Jozwiak P, et al. Gene and protein expression of glucose transporter 1 and glucose transporter 3 in human laryngeal cancer-the relationship with regulatory hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha expression, tumor invasiveness, and patient prognosis. Tumour Biol. 2015;36:2309–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar