Polymorphic deletions of the GSTT1 and GSTM1 genes and susceptibility to bladder cancer

Polymorphisms in drug-metabolizing genes and urinary bladder cancer susceptibility and prognosis: Possible impacts and future management

Epidemiological studies have shown the association of genetic variants with risks of occupational and environmentally induced cancers, including bladder (BC). The current review summarizes the effects of variants in genes encoding phase I and II enzymes in well-designed studies to highlight their contribution to BC susceptibility and prognosis. Polymorphisms in genes codifying drug-metabolizing proteins are of particular interest because of their involvement in the metabolism of exogenous genotoxic compounds, such as tobacco and agrochemicals. The prognosis between muscle-invasive and non-muscle-invasive diseases is very different, and it is difficult to predict which will progress worse. Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline were searched to identify studies published between January 1, 2010, and February 2023. We included 73 eligible studies, more than 300 polymorphisms, and 46 genes/loci. The most studied candidate genes/loci of phase I metabolism were CYP1B1, CYP1A1, CYP1A2, CYP3A4, CYP2D6, CYP2A6, CYP3E1, and ALDH2, and those in phase II were GSTM1, GSTT1, NAT2, GSTP1, GSTA1, GSTO1, and UGT1A1. We used the 46 genes to construct a network of proteins and to evaluate their biological functions based on the Reactome and KEGG databases. Lastly, we assessed their expression in different tissues, including normal bladder and BC samples. The drug-metabolizing pathway plays a relevant role in BC, and our review discusses a list of genes that could provide clues for further exploration of susceptibility and prognostic biomarkers.

Sexual dimorphism in bladder cancer: a review of etiology, biology, diagnosis, and outcomes

Bladder carcinoma represents a prevalent malignancy, wherein the influence of sex extends across its incidence, biological attributes, and clinical outcomes. This scholarly exposition meticulously examines pertinent investigations, elucidating the nuanced impact of sex on bladder cancer, and posits cogent avenues for future research and intervention modalities. In the initial discourse, an exhaustive scrutiny is undertaken of the etiological underpinnings of bladder cancer, encompassing variables such as tobacco consumption, occupational exposures, and genetic aberrations. Subsequently, a comprehensive dissection unfolds, delving into the intricate biological disparities inherent in sex vis-à-vis the initiation and progression of bladder cancer. This analytical framework embraces multifaceted considerations, spanning sex hormones, sex chromosomal dynamics, metabolic enzymatic cascades, and the intricate interplay with the microbiome. Lastly, a synthesized exposition encapsulates the ramifications of gender differentials on the diagnostic and prognostic landscapes of bladder cancer, underscoring the imperative for intensified investigative endeavors directed towards elucidating gender-specific variances and the formulation of tailored therapeutic strategies.

The androgen receptor in bladder cancer

Bladder cancer is the ninth most common cancer worldwide with a striking sex-based difference in incidence. Emerging evidence indicates that the androgen receptor (AR) might promote the development, progression and recurrence of bladder cancer, contributing to the observed sex differences. Targeting androgen-AR signalling has promise as potential therapy for bladder cancer and helps to suppress progression of this disease. In addition, the identification of a new membrane AR and AR-regulated non-coding RNAs has important implications for bladder cancer treatment. The success of human clinical trials of targeted-AR therapies will help in the development of improved treatments for patients with bladder cancer.

Targeting bladder cancer: A sex sensitive perspective in mutations and outcomes

The incidence of bladder cancer (BC) is more common in males, however, the clinical outcome for females tends to be more unfavorable, as demonstrated by a 21% increase in mortality compared to males within two years of diagnosis. While it was previously believed that the differences in outcome were solely the result of differences in sex chromosomes and hormones, it is now acknowledged that a more intricate interplay of factors is at play. By acquiring a more comprehensive understanding of these sex-specific effects, future efforts in precision medicine can be customized to an individual's biological sex. This narrative review aims to summarize our knowledge of the molecular classification of sex differences in BC by compiling the existing evidence on genetic disparities between males and females and evaluating these disparities in both noninvasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Our findings emphasize the significance of considering sex as a factor in future clinical trials and registry studies due to established differences in immune composition, molecular profiling, and genetic mutations between males and females. Further investigation into the molecular processes involved in the evasion or resistance of immune-based therapies, such as Bacillus Calmette-Guérin and other immunotherapies, is essential to identify markers of response or resistance that vary between male and female patients. This will aid in optimizing treatment and promoting equitable outcomes, particularly in NMIBC cases.

Association of Glutathione S-transferase gene polymorphism with bladder Cancer susceptibility

BACKGROUND

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between the glutathione S-transferase μ1 (GSTM1)- and glutathione S-transferase θ1 (GSTT1)- null genotypes and susceptibility to bladder cancer.

METHODS

We identified association reports from the databases of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the China Biological Medicine Database (CBM disc) on July 1, 2017 and synthesized eligible investigations. Results were expressed using odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data, and we also calculated 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, we found that the GSTM1-null genotype was associated with bladder cancer risk in the overall population, and individually in whites, Africans and Asians (overall population: OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.31-1.48, P<0.00001; whites: OR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.26-1.54, P<0.00001; Africans: OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.16-2.05, P = 0.003; Asians: OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.33-1.59, P<0.00001). The GSTT1-null genotype was associated with bladder cancer risk in the overall population, but not in whites, in Africans or Asians (overall population: OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.01-1.22, P = 0.03; whites: OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.99-1.36, P = 0.07; Africans: OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.65-1.76, P = 0.79; Asians: OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.91-1.22, P = 0.51). Interestingly, a dual-null GSTM1-GSTT1 genotype was associated with bladder cancer risk in the overall population and in Asians (overall population: OR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.15-1.92, P = 0.002; Asians: OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.15-2.28, P = 0.006). In conclusion, the GSTM1-null, GSTT1-null and dual-null GSTM1-GSTT1 genotypes might be associated with the onset of bladder cancer, but additional genetic-epidemiological studies should be conducted to explore this association further.

GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms are associated with increased bladder cancer risk: Evidence from updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have indicated association between GSTM1 and GSTT1 gene polymorphisms and bladder cancer susceptibility, but the results have been inconclusive. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to investigate the association between GSTM1/GSTT1 deletion polymorphisms and bladder cancer susceptibility.

METHODS

We searched for all studies investigating the association between GSTM1 or GSTT1 polymorphism and bladder cancer susceptibility in Pubmed, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Search Library. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Subgroup analyses were performed on different ethnicity, population-based and smoking status.

RESULTS

Our search identified 63 studies. GSTM1 null, GSTT1 null and GSTM1/GSTT1 double-null genotypes were associated with increased risk of bladder cancer (OR: 1.36 95% CI: 1.25-1.47, P<0.01; OR: 1.13 95% CI: 1.02-1.25, P<0.01; OR: 1.84 95% CI: 1.50-2.26, P<0.01). Subgroup analyses indicated that the GSTM1-null genotype was associated with increased risk of bladder cancer in Caucasians and Asians, while the GSTT1-null genotype was associated with increased risk of bladder cancer in Caucasians. The GSTM1/GSTT1 double-null genotype was associated with increased risk of bladder cancer in Caucasians, Asians, and Africans. Stratified analyses of population-based associations indicated increased bladder cancer risk associated with GSTM1-null and GSTM1/GSTT1 double-null genotypes in hospital-based and population-based studies. GSTM1 deletion was associated with increased bladder cancer risk in both smokers and nonsmokers. Non-smokers with the GSTM1/GSTT1 double-null genotype had an increased bladder cancer risk.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates that the GSTM1-null, GSTT1-null, and GSTM1/GSTT1 double-null genotypes are associated with increased bladder cancer risk.

Lack of any association of GST genetic polymorphisms with susceptibility to ovarian cancer--a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Epidemiology studies have reported conflicting results between glutathione S-transferase Mu-1 (GSTM1), glutathione S-transferase theta-1 (GSTT1) and glutathione S-transferase pi-1 (GSTP1) and ovarian cancer (OC) susceptibility. In this study, an updated meta-analysis was applied to determine whether the deletion of GSTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1 has an influence on OC susceptibility.

METHODS

A published literature search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index Expanded database for articles published in English. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated using random or fixed effects models. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the Cochrane Q test and I2 statistics. Sub-group analysis was conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was employed to evaluate the respective influence of each study on the overall estimate.

RESULTS

In total, 10 published studies were included in the final analysis. The combined analysis revealed that there was no significant association between GSTM1 null genotype and OC risk (OR=1.01, 95%CI: 0.91-1.12). Additionally, there was no significant association between GSTT1 genetic polymorphisms and OC risk (OR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.85-1.13). Similalry, no significant associations were found concerning the GSTP1 rs1695 locus and OC risk. Meanwhile, subgroup analysis did not show a significant increase in eligible studies with low heterogeneity. However, sensitivity analysis, publication bias and cumulative analysis demonstrated the reliability and stability of the current meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that GSTs genetic polymorphisms may not contribute to OC susceptibility. Large epidemiological studies with the combination of GSTM1 null, GSTT1 null and GSTP1 Ile105Val polymorphisms and more specific histological subtypes of OC are needed to prove our findings.

CYP1A1 and GSTP1 gene variations in breast cancer: a systematic review and case-control study

In first part of this study, a systematic review was designed to explore the involvement of CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes in breast cancerogenesis. Based on systematic review, we designed a study to screen CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes for mutation and their possible association with breast carcinogenesis. A total of 400 individuals were collected and analyzed by PCR-SSCP. After sequence analysis of coding region of CYP1A1 we identified eleven mutations in different exons of respective gene. Among these eleven mutations, ~3 folds increased breast cancer risk was found associated with Asp82Glu mutation (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.26-7.09), with Ser83Thr mutation (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.26-7.09) and with Glu86Ala mutation (OR 3.18; 95% CI 1.27-7.93) in cancer patients compared to controls. Furthermore, ~4 folds increase in breast cancer risk was found associated with Asp347Glu, Phe398Tyr and 5178delT mutations (OR 3.92; 95% CI 1.35-11.3) in patients compared to controls. The sequence analysis of GSTP1 resulted in identification of total five mutations. Among these five mutations, ~3 folds increase in breast cancer risk was observed associated with 1860G>A mutation, with 1861-1876delCAGCCCTCTGGAGTGG mutation (OR 2.70; 95% CI 1.10-6.62) and with 1861C>A mutation (OR 2.97; 95% CI 1.01-8.45) in cancer patients compared to controls. Furthermore, ~5 folds increase in breast cancer risk was associated with 1883G>T mutation (OR 4.75; 95% CI 1.46-15.3) and ~6 folds increase in breast cancer risk was found associated with Iso105Val mutation (OR 6.43; 95% CI 1.41-29.3) in cancer patients compared to controls. Our finding, based on systematic review and experimental data suggest that the polymorphic CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes may contribute to risk of developing breast cancer.

The relationship between GSTA1, GSTM1, GSTP1, and GSTT1 genetic polymorphisms and bladder cancer susceptibility: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have investigated the relationship between GSTA1, GSTM1, GSTP1, and GSTT1 polymorphisms and bladder cancer (BCa) susceptibility, respectively, but the results remain inconsistent. So, we conducted this meta-analysis including 79 case-control studies to explore such relationships.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and CNKI for relevant available studies. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were implemented to evaluate the intensity of associations. Publication bias was estimated using Begg funnel plots and Egger regression test. To assess the stability of the results, we used sensitivity analysis with the method of calculating the results again by omitting 1 single study each time. Between-study heterogeneity was tested using the I statistic.

RESULTS

No significant association between GSTA1 polymorphism and BCa susceptibility (OR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.83-1.33) was noted. Besides, meaningful association between individuals who carried the GSTM1 null genotype and increased BCa risk was detected (OR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.28-1.51). When stratified by ethnicity, significant difference was found in both Caucasian (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.23-1.58) and Asian populations (OR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.31-1.61). Moreover, in the subgroup analysis by source of controls (SOC), the results were significant in both hospital-based control groups (OR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.35-1.64) and population-based control groups (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.07-1.37). Additionally, the analysis revealed no significant association between GSTP1 polymorphism and BCa risk (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.96-1.20). What is more, significant associations between GSTT1 polymorphism and BCa susceptibility were discovered (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.00-1.22). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, significant associations between GSTT1 null genotype and BCa risk were observed only in Caucasians (OR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.09-1.44). Furthermore, when stratified by SOC, no obvious relationship was found between the GSTT1 null genotype polymorphism with hospital-based population (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.97-1.28) or population-based population (OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.96-1.27).

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that GSTM1 null genotype and GSTT1 null genotype might be related to higher BCa risk, respectively. However, no associations were observed between GSTA1 or GSTP1 polymorphisms and BCa susceptibility.

GSTT1 Null Genotype Significantly Increases the Susceptibility to Urinary System Cancer: Evidences from 63,876 Subjects

GSTT1 gene plays an important role in detoxification and clearance of reactive oxygen species(ROS). A null variant in this gene has been demonstrated to confer cancer susceptibility. Although many studies have demonstrated the association between GSTT1 null polymorphism and urinary system cancer susceptibility, several publications reported opposite conclusions. For better understanding the effects of this polymorphism on the risk of urinary system cancer, a updated meta-analysis was performed with a total of 26,666 cases and 37,210 controls extracted from 117 studies, by following the latest meta-analysis guidelines (PRISMA). The results suggested that the GSTT1 null genotype was significantly associated with an increased risk of urinary system cancer (OR=1.13, 95%CI=1.05-1.22). Furthermore, stratified analyses by the type of cancer, ethnicity, source of control and quality score presented a significantly increased risk associated with GSTT1 null genotype in bladder and prostate cancer subgroup, Caucasians and Indians subgroup, population-based(PB) subgroup, medium quality and low quality subgroup. Overall, our meta-analysis suggested that GSTT1 null genotype is a potential cancer susceptibility variant. Well-designed and large-cohort studies are needed to confirm the association between GSTT1 null genotype and urinary system cancer risk.

Glutathione S-transferase M1 and T1 polymorphisms: susceptibility and outcomes in muscle invasive bladder cancer patients

BACKGROUND

We investigated whether genetic polymorphisms in the glutathione S transferase mu (GSTM1) and theta (GSTT1) genes modulated risk, disease progression and survival in primary muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

METHODS

GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms were analysed by multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using blood genomic DNA in 110 MIBC patients and 220 gender- and age-matched healthy controls. The influence of the genetic polymorphisms on patient survival was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox Proportional Hazard models. We also evaluated whether cigarette smoking and treatment modality modified the association between genotype and prognosis.

RESULTS

GSTM1-null individuals exhibited increased risk for MIBC and an association with cigarette smoking. GSTT1-null subjects showed significant disease progression and cancer-specific death. In the combined analysis, GSTT1-null genotype was an independent risk factor for disease progression and cancer specific death regardless of GSTM1 genotype. Significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were seen based on GSTT1 genotype. The survival impact of the GSTT1 genotype was only valid for smokers. The GSTT1-null genotype was an independent prognostic factor for shorter PFS in patients who received chemotherapy and those who did not undergo radical cystectomy. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, GSTT1-null genotype was a predictive factor for disease progression and cancer specific survival regardless of treatment modality.

CONCLUSIONS

The GSTM1-null genotype plays an important role in genetic susceptibility to MIBC and the GSTT1-null genotype is associated with disease progression and shorter survival in MIBC.

Glutathione S-transferase P1 gene polymorphism and bladder cancer susceptibility: an updated analysis

Studies investigating the association between glutathione S-transferase P1 (GSTP1) gene polymorphism and bladder cancer (BC) risk have reported conflicting results. In order to clarify the effect of GSTP1 polymorphism on the BC susceptibility, we conducted an updated system review of published epidemiology studies to provide more precise evidence. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). 20 studies with 4,428 BC cases and 5,457 controls were identified. The combined analyses based on all studies showed that there was a significant difference in the genotype distribution in GSTP1(A313G) polymorphism between BC cases and controls not only in Asians (GG vs. AA + AG, OR = 1.59, 95 % CI = 1.01-2.51) but also in Caucasians (GG vs. AA + AG, OR = 1.51, 95 % CI = 1.11-2.06). Upon stratification for smoking status, we observed no statistically significant difference in genotype distribution of GSTP1 in ever-smokers. Combination of the high-risk genotypes (GSTM1 null + GSTT1 null + GSTP1 313 A/G or G/G) demonstrated further increase in the BC risk (OR = 6.64, 95 %CI = 3.63-12.16). This meta-analysis suggests that GSTP1 313 G/G polymorphism is a strong predisposing risk factor for BC.