Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Jul;30(7):1155-60.
doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgp077. Epub 2009 Apr 16.

EGFR pathway polymorphisms and bladder cancer susceptibility and prognosis

Affiliations

EGFR pathway polymorphisms and bladder cancer susceptibility and prognosis

Rebecca A Mason et al. Carcinogenesis. 2009 Jul.

Abstract

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway has recently been appreciated as a central mediator of tumorigenesis and an important drug target; however, the influence of genetic variation in this pathway on bladder cancer is not understood. Pathway activation leads to cell proliferation, angiogenesis and is antiapoptotic. We sought to test the hypothesis that bladder cancer susceptibility and survival are modified by inherited variations in the sequence of the EGFR and its pathway members. We tested associations using a population-based study of 857 bladder cancer cases and 1191 controls from New Hampshire. Multifactor dimensionality reduction software was used to predict gene-gene interactions. We detected an increased risk of bladder cancer associated with variant genotypes for the single nucleotide polymorphisms EGFR_03 [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-2.8)] and EGFR_05 [adjusted OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.1)] compared with wild-type. EGFR variants experienced longer survival than those with wild-type alleles [e.g. adjusted hazard ratio EGFR_1808 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.9)]. In contrast, the variant form of the ligand, EGF_04, had worse survival [adjusted hazard ratio 1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.3)] compared with wild-type. Our findings suggest modified bladder cancer risk and survival associated with genetic variation in the EGFR pathway. Understanding these genetic influences on increased bladder cancer susceptibility and survival may help in cancer prevention, drug development and choice of therapeutic regimen.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
EGFR haploview LD plot. LD plot of EGFR SNPs showed 20% LD between significant SNPs EGFR_05 and EGFR_03. This plot shows that the tested SNPs were in tagged regions of the gene with low linkage and did not measure redundant loci.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Bladder cancer survival in relation to EGFR pathway SNPs. Kaplan–Meier plots show survival by (A) EGFR_05 genotype, and (B) EGFR_1808 genotype. Hazard ratios for heterozygotes and variants compared with wild-type were calculated using Cox proportional hazards modeling with adjustment for age, gender, smoking status, stage/grade and treatment. Black lines are homozygous wild-type, light grey are homozygous variant and dark grey are heterozygous.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Level of pEGFR, EGFR and CCND1 protein in bladder tumors by genotype. Intensity of bladder tumor cells staining positively for pEGFR, EGFR and CCND1 is graphed by genotype for the EGFR_05 SNP. Staining intensity was scored on a scale of 0–4 by a single pathologist.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kirkali Z, et al. Bladder cancer: epidemiology, staging and grading, and diagnosis. Urology. 2005;66:4–34. - PubMed
    1. Kantor AF, et al. Familial and environmental interactions in bladder cancer risk. Int. J. Cancer. 1985;35:703–706. - PubMed
    1. Garcia-Closas M, et al. NAT2 slow acetylation, GSTM1 null genotype, and risk of bladder cancer: results from the Spanish Bladder Cancer Study and meta-analyses. Lancet. 2005;366:649–659. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jemal A, et al. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2007;57:43–66. - PubMed
    1. Kawakami T, et al. Inactivation of the hMSH3 mismatch repair gene in bladder cancer. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2004;325:934–942. - PubMed

Publication types