Distinct SNP Combinations Confer Susceptibility to Urinary Bladder Cancer in Smokers and Non-Smokers |
| |
Authors: | Holger Schwender Silvia Selinski Meinolf Blaszkewicz Rosemarie Marchan Katja Ickstadt Klaus Golka Jan G. Hengstler |
| |
Affiliation: | 1Mathematical Institute, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany;2Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors (IfADo), Dortmund, Germany;3Faculty of Statistics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany;Johns Hopkins University, United States of America |
| |
Abstract: | Recently, genome-wide association studies have identified and validated genetic variations associated with urinary bladder cancer (UBC). However, it is still unknown whether the high-risk alleles of several SNPs interact with one another, leading to an even higher disease risk. Additionally, there is no information available on how the UBC risk due to these SNPs compare to the risk of cigarette smoking and to occupational exposure to urinary bladder carcinogens, and whether the same or different SNP combinations are relevant in smokers and non-smokers. To address these questions, we analyzed the genotypes of six SNPs, previously found to be associated with UBC, together with the GSTM1 deletion, in 1,595 UBC cases and 1,760 controls, stratified for smoking habits. We identified the strongest interactions of different orders and tested the stability of their effect by bootstrapping. We found that different SNP combinations were relevant in smokers and non-smokers. In smokers, polymorphisms involved in detoxification of cigarette smoke carcinogens were most relevant (GSTM1, rs11892031), in contrast to those in non-smokers with MYC and APOBEC3A near polymorphisms (rs9642880, rs1014971) being the most influential. Stable combinations of up to three high-risk alleles resulted in higher odds ratios (OR) than the individual SNPs, although the interaction effect was less than additive. The highest stable combination effects resulted in an OR of about 2.0, which is still lower than the ORs of cigarette smoking (here, current smokers'' OR: 3.28) and comparable to occupational carcinogen exposure risks which, depending on the workplace, show mostly ORs up to 2.0. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|