MTHFR polymorphisms, dietary folate intake and breast cancer risk in Chinese women

被引:0
作者
Chang-Ming Gao
Jin-Hai Tang
Hai-Xia Cao
Jian-Hua Ding
Jian-Zhong Wu
Jie Wang
Yan-Ting Liu
Su-Ping Li
Ping Su
Keitaro Matsuo
Toshiro Takezaki
Kazuo Tajima
机构
[1] Jiangsu Province Institute of Cancer Research,Division of Epidemiology
[2] Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute,Division of Epidemiology and Prevention
[3] Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences,Department of International Island and Community Medicine
[4] 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka,undefined
来源
Journal of Human Genetics | 2009年 / 54卷
关键词
breast cancer; folate; genetic polymorphisms; methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase; susceptibility;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
To evaluate the relationship between dietary folate intake and genetic polymorphisms of 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) with reference to breast cancer risk, we conducted a case–control study with 669 cases and 682 population-based controls in the Jiangsu Province of China. MTHFR C677T and A1298C genotypes were identified using PCR–RFLP (restrictrion fragment length polymorphism) methods. Dietary folate intake was assessed using an 83-item food frequency questionnaire. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated with an unconditional logistic model. The frequencies of MTHFR C677T C/C, C/T and T/T genotypes were 32.37, 48.88 and 18.75% in cases and 37.66, 48.24 and 14.10% in controls, respectively. The difference in distribution was significant (χ2=6.616, P=0.037), the T/T genotype being associated with an elevated OR (adjusted for age, menopausal status, body mass index (BMI), income, work intensity and status of smoking and drinking) for breast cancer (1.62, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14–2.30). The frequencies of MTHFR A1298C A/A, A/C and C/C were 71.47, 27.08 and 1.44% in cases and 68.11, 30.13 and 1.76% in controls, respectively, with no significant differences being found (χ2=1.716, P=0.424). A significant inverse relationship was observed between folate intake and breast cancer risk. Compared with the lowest tertile of folate intake, the adjusted OR for breast cancer in the top tertile was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.53–0.92). However, no significant interaction was observed between folate intake and the MTHFR C677T polymorphism. Among individuals with the MTHFR A1298C A/A genotype, adjusted ORs for breast cancer were 0.89 (0.62–1.27) and 1.69 (1.20–2.36) for the second to the third tertile of folate intake compared with the highest folate intake group (tread test, P=0.0008). The findings of this study suggest that MTHFR genetic polymorphisms and dietary intake of folate may modify susceptibility to breast cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:414 / 418
页数:4
相关论文
共 201 条
[1]  
Kim YI(1999)Folate and carcinogenesis: evidence, mechanisms, and implications J. Nutr. Biochem. 10 66-88
[2]  
Mason JB(2000)Folate and carcinogenesis: developing a unifying hypothesis Adv. Enzyme Regul. 40 127-141
[3]  
Choi SW(1999)Polymorphisms of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase and other enzymes: metabolic significance, risks and impact on folate requirement J. Nutr. 129 919-922
[4]  
Bailey LB(2000)Folate and carcinogenesis: an integrated scheme J. Nutr. 130 129-132
[5]  
Gregory JF(2000)Molecular biology of 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase J. Nephrol. 13 20-33
[6]  
Choi SW(1995)A candidate genetic risk factor for vascular disease: a common mutation in methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase Nat. Genet. 10 111-113
[7]  
Mason JB(1998)A second common mutation in the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene: an additional risk factor for neural-tube defects? Am. J. Hum. Genet. 62 1044-1051
[8]  
Fodinger M(1998)A second genetic polymorphism in methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) associated with decreased enzyme activity Mol. Genet. Metab. 64 169-172
[9]  
Horl WH(2008)Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, common polymorphisms, and relation to disease Vitam. Horm. 79 375-392
[10]  
Sunder-Plassmann G(2008)Meta- and pooled analyses of the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T and A1298C polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk: a huge-GSEC review Am. J. Epidemiol. 167 505-516