CDH1 promoter polymorphism and stomach cancer susceptibility

Association of CDH1 -160 C → A and -347 G→ GA polymorphisms and expression of E-cadherin and gastric cancer: A case-control study

Objectives

The loss of function of the E-cadherin (CDH1) gene with -160 C→A and -347 G→GA polymorphisms is regarded as a critical step for gastric cancer. It was aimed to investigate possible association of these polymorphisms and immunoexpression of E-cadherin with gastric cancer.

Material and Methods

Gastric adenocarcinoma patients and individuals with benign gastric pathologies were included in this case-control study. Demographic data and pathological findings were recorded. Immunohistochemical staining of E-cadherin expression and analysis of -160 C→A and -347 G→GA polymorphisms were done. Differences between allele frequencies of -160 C→A and -347 G→GA polymorphisms and expression of E-cadherin were the primary outcomes.

Results

There were 78 gastric cancer patients (Group A) and 113 individuals with benign gastric pathologies (Group B). The number of male patients and mean age were higher in Group A (p <0.001). -160 C→A and 347 G→GA polymorphisms and their allelic distributions showed no difference between the groups (p> 0.05 for all). There was a significant association between -160 C→A polymorphism and grade of E-cadherin expression (p= 0.013). There were no significant differences between survival rates with -160 C→A, 347 G→GA and intensity of E-cadherin expression (p> 0.05 for all). There was no significant association between -160 C→A and -347 G→GA polymorphisms and gastric cancer.

Conclusion

There was no impact of E-cadherin expression on tumoral features and survival in gastric cancer. -160 C→A polymorphism may influence the expression of E-cadherin in gastric cancer.

Clinical and biological significance of a - 73A > C variation in the CDH1 promoter of patients with sporadic gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

CDH1 germline mutations lead to hereditary diffuse gastric carcinomas. However, it is unclear whether genetic variations in the CDH1 promoter affect the progression of sporadic gastric carcinomas (SGCs).

METHODS

SGC patients in two independent cohorts with follow-up data were enrolled. The CDH1 genotypes, including the - 73A > C polymorphism (rs28372783), were determined by PCR sequencing. The CDH1 promoter activity was determined using reporter assays. SNAIL bound to CDH1 alleles was determined by chromatin immunoprecipitation primer extension PCR. CDH1 DNA methylation was determined by bisulfite-based PCR analyses.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analyses showed that the overall survival (OS) of the - 73C/C patients was significantly longer than that of the - 73A/C or - 73A/A patients in a Chinese cohort [n = 526; hazard ratio 0.68 (95% CI 0.47-1.00)], which was validated in an independent Korea cohort [n = 215; hazard ratio 0.49 (95% CI 0.26-0.94)]. Moreover, the transcription activity of the - 73C alleles was significantly higher than that of the - 73A alleles in vitro and in vivo. The ratio of SNAIL recruited to the promoter regions of the - 73C and - 73A alleles was 1:10, indicating a strong influence of this polymorphism on the recruitment of SNAIL to the flanking E-box. The prevalence of DNA methylation of the CpG island and shore within the promoter of the - 73C allele was much less than that of the - 73A allele in both gastric tissues and cancer cell lines.

CONCLUSION

The - 73A > C variation may lead to differences in the overall survival of SGC patients and allele-specific repressions of CDH1.

Clinical relevance of breast and gastric cancer-associated polymorphisms as potential susceptibility markers for oral clefts in the Brazilian population

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological studies have indicated a higher incidence of breast and gastric cancer in patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (NSCL ± P) and their relatives, which can be based on similar genetic triggers segregated within family with NSCL ± P.

METHODS

This multicenter study evaluated the association of 9 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in AXIN2 and CDH1, representing genes consistently altered in breast and gastric tumors, with NSCL ± P in 223 trios (father, mother and patient with NSCL ± P) by transmission disequilibrium test (TDT).

RESULTS

Our results showed that the minor A allele of rs7210356 (p = 0.01) and the T-G-G-A-G haplotype formed by rs7591, rs7210356, rs4791171, rs11079571 and rs3923087 SNPs (p = 0.03) in AXIN2 were significantly under-transmitted to patients with NSCL ± P. In CDH1 gene, the C-G-A-A and A-G-A-G haplotypes composed by rs16260, rs9929218, rs7186053 and rs4783573 polymorphisms were respectively over-transmitted (p = 0.01) and under-transmitted (p = 0.008) from parents to the children with NSCL ± P.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that polymorphic variants in AXIN2 and CDH1 may be associated with NSCL ± P susceptibility, and reinforce the putative link between cancer and oral clefts.

CDH1 mutations in gastric cancer patients from northern Brazil identified by Next- Generation Sequencing (NGS)

Gastric cancer is considered to be the fifth highest incident tumor worldwide and the third leading cause of cancer deaths. Developing regions report a higher number of sporadic cases, but there are only a few local studies related to hereditary cases of gastric cancer in Brazil to confirm this fact. CDH1 germline mutations have been described both in familial and sporadic cases, but there is only one recent molecular description of individuals from Brazil. In this study we performed Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) to assess CDH1 germline mutations in individuals who match the clinical criteria for Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC), or who exhibit very early diagnosis of gastric cancer. Among five probands we detected CDH1 germline mutations in two cases (40%). The mutation c.1023T > G was found in a HDGC family and the mutation c.1849G > A, which is nearly exclusive to African populations, was found in an early-onset case of gastric adenocarcinoma. The mutations described highlight the existence of gastric cancer cases caused by CDH1 germline mutations in northern Brazil, although such information is frequently ignored due to the existence of a large number of environmental factors locally. Our report represent the first CDH1 mutations in HDGC described from Brazil by an NGS platform.

Lack of association between the CDH1 polymorphism and gastric cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis

E-Cadherin (CDH1) plays a key role in cell adhesion, which is vital to the normal development and maintenance of cells. Down regulation of CDH1, may lead to dysfunction of the cell-cell adhesion system, resulting in increased susceptibility to tumor development and subsequent tumor cell invasion and metastasis. The CDH1 C-160A polymorphism could decrease its transcription efficiency and may increase susceptibility to cancer development, but its relevance to gastric cancer is generally disputed. Consequently, we performed a meta-analysis of published case-control studies, including 4218 gastric cancer cases and 5461 controls. Overall, no significant association was observed between the CDH1 C-160A polymorphism and risk of gastric cancer in all genetic models. In the stratified analysis by total sample size, a significant association was observed in the small sample size subgroup (total sample size < 300), but the results should be interpreted with caution. In conclusion, this meta-analysis failed to confirm the association between the CDH1 C-160A polymorphism and risk of gastric cancer. Large-scale and well-designed studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Association of genetic variants in and promoter hypermethylation of CDH1 with gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

Gastric cancer (GC) is a common cause of cancer-related death. The etiology and pathogenesis of GC remain unclear, with genetic and epigenetic factors playing an important role. Previous studies investigated the association of GC with many genetic variants in and promoter hypermethylation of E-cadherin gene (CDH1), with conflicting results reported.To clarify this inconsistency, we conducted updated meta-analyses to assess the association of genetic variants in and the promoter hypermethylation of CDH1 with GC, including C-160A (rs16260) and other less-studied genetic variants,Data sources were PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge, and HuGE, a navigator for human genome epidemiology.Study eligibility criteria and participant details are as follows: studies were conducted on human subjects; outcomes of interest include GC; report of genotype data of individual genetic variants in (or methylation status of) CDH1 in participants with and without GC (or providing odds ratios [OR] and their variances).Study appraisal and synthesis methods included the use of OR as a measure of the association, calculated from random effects models in meta-analyses. We used I for the assessment of between-study heterogeneity, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plot and Egger test.A total of 33 studies from 30 published articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in our analyses. We found no association between C-160A and GC (OR = 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.08; P = 0.215), assuming an additive model (reference allele C). C-160A was associated with cardia (OR = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.41; P = 2.60 × 10), intestinal (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.90; P = 0.008), and diffuse GC (OR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.82; P = 0.002). The association of C-160A with noncardia GC is of bottom line significance (OR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.42-1.01; P = 0.054). Multiple other less-studied genetic variants in CDH1 also exhibited association with GC. Gene-based analysis indicated a significant cumulative association of genetic variants in CDH1 with GC (all Ps <10). Sensitivity analysis excluding studies not meeting Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) yielded similar results. Analysis by ethnic groups revealed significant association of C-160A with cardia GC in both Asian and whites, significant association with noncardia GC only in Asians, and no significant association with intestinal GC in both ethnic groups. There was significant association of C160-A with diffuse GC in Asians (P = 0.011) but not in whites (P = 0.081). However, after excluding studies that violate HWE, this observed association is no longer significant (P = 0.126). We observed strong association of promoter hypermethylation of CDH1 with GC (OR = 12.23; 95% CI, 8.80-17.00; P = 1.42 × 10), suggesting that epigenetic regulation of CDH1 could play a critical role in the etiology of GC.Limitations of this study are as follows: we could not adjust for confounding factors; some meta-analyses were based on a small number of studies; sensitivity analysis was limited due to unavailability of data; we could not test publication bias for some meta-analyses due to small number of included studies.We found no significant association of the widely studied genetic variant C-160A, but identified some other genetic variants showing significant association with GC. Future studies with large sample sizes that control for confounding risk factors and/or intensively interrogate CpG sites in CDH1 are needed to validate the results found in this study and to explore additional epigenetic loci that affect GC risk.

Perspectives on new biomarkers in gastric cancer: Diagnostic and prognostic applications

Gastric cancer is considered one of the most deadly tumors worldwide. Even with the decline in its incidence, the mortality rate of this disease has remained high, mainly due to its late diagnosis and to the lack of precise prognostic markers. The main purpose of this review is to present genetic, epigenetic and proteomic molecular markers that may be used in a diagnostic and prognostic manner and to discuss the pros and cons of each type of marker for improving clinical practice. In this sense, we observed that the use of genetic markers, especially mutations and polymorphisms, should be carefully considered, as they are strongly affected by ethnicity. Proteomic-based markers show promise, but the higher costs of the associated techniques continue to make this approach expensive for routine use. Alternatively, epigenetic markers appear to be very promising, as they can be detected in bodily fluids as well as tissues. However, such markers must be used carefully because epigenetic changes may occur due to environmental factors and aging. Despite the advances in technology and its access, to date, there are few defined biomarkers of prognostic and diagnostic use for gastric tumors. Therefore, the use of a panel of several approaches (genetic, epigenetic and proteomic) should be considered the best alternative for clinical practice.

Host genetic factors respond to pathogenic step-specific virulence factors of Helicobacter pylori in gastric carcinogenesis

The interindividual differences in risk of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori)-associated gastric cancer involve significant heterogeneities of both host genetics and H. pylori strains. Several recent studies proposed a distinct sequence for H. pylori exerting its virulence in the host stomach: (i) adhering to and colonizing the surface of gastric epithelial cells, (ii) evading and attenuating the host defense, and (iii) invading and damaging the gastric mucosa. This review focuses on several key issues that still need to be clarified, such as which virulence factors of H. pylori are involved in the three pathogenic steps, which host genes respond to the step-specific virulence factors, and whether and/or how the corresponding host genetic variations influence the risk of gastric carcinogenesis. Urease, BabA and SabA in the adhesion-step, PGN and LPS in the immune evasion-step, and CagA, VacA and Tipα in the mucosal damage-step were documented to play an important role in step-specific pathogenicity of H. pylori infection. There is evidence further supporting a role of potentially functional polymorphisms of host genes directly responding to these pathogenic step-specific virulence factors in the susceptibility of gastric carcinogenesis, especially for urease-interacting HLA class II genes, BabA-interacting MUC1, PGN-interacting NOD1, LPS-interacting TLR4, and CagA-interacting PTPN11 and CDH1. With the continuous improvement of understanding the genetic profile of H. pylori-associated gastric carcinogenesis, a person at increased risk for gastric cancer may benefit from several aspects of efforts: (i) prevent H. pylori infection with a vaccine targeting certain step-specific virulence factor; (ii) eradicate H. pylori infection by blocking step-specific psychopathological characteristics of virulence factors; and (iii) adjust host physiological function to resist the carcinogenic role of step-specific virulence factors or interrupt the cellular signal transduction of the interplay between H. pylori and host in each pathogenic step, especially for the subjects with precancerous lesions in the stomach.