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
. 2017 Dec;16(6):692-704.
doi: 10.1177/1533034617724678. Epub 2017 Aug 11.

Association Between the Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, and Arg156Arg Polymorphisms in XPD and the Risk of Prostate Cancer

Weijin Fu  1   2 , Feifan Xiao  2 , Ruoheng Zhang  2 , Jiatong Li  2 , Dong Zhao  2 , Xuandong Lin  2 , Yanzhen Xu  2 , Xiaowei Song  2 , Zhibin Xie  2 , Qiongxian Wen  3 , Xiaoli Yang  2
Affiliations

Association Between the Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, and Arg156Arg Polymorphisms in XPD and the Risk of Prostate Cancer

Weijin Fu et al. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Dec.

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most common solid cancer and genetic factors play important roles in its pathogenesis. XPD is one of the 8 core genes involved in the nucleotide excision repair pathway. The relationship between Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, and Arg156Arg polymorphisms in XPD and prostate cancer risk is a controversial topic. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to explore the relationship between these 3 polymorphisms and the risk of developing prostate cancer. We searched the electronic literature in PubMed and Google Scholar for all relevant studies (last updated January 1, 2017). The pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the associations between the Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, or Arg156Arg polymorphisms in XPD and prostate cancer risk were calculated. To evaluate the effects of specific study characteristics on the association of these 3 polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk, we performed subgroup analysis if 2 or more studies were available. After an extensive literature review, 7 publications regarding Asp312Asn genotype distribution with 8 case-controls, 9 publications regarding Lys751Gln genotype distribution with 10 case-controls, and 3 publications regarding Arg156Arg genotype distribution with 4 case-controls were selected. The results showed that Asp312Asn (odds ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.96-1.87, P = .000), Lys751Gln (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.89-1.08, P = .986), and Arg156Arg (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval: 0.91-1.22, P = .57) polymorphisms do not increase the risk of prostate cancer in the dominant model. Further, in the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, no relationships were observed between Lys751Gln and Arg156Arg polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk. However, stratified analysis by ethnicity revealed that Asp312Asn affects African (odds ratio = 1.57, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-2.33, P = .382) and Asian populations (odds ratio = 2.09, 95% confidence interval: 1.39-3.14, P = .396) in homozygote comparison. In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that there is no general association between the Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, and Arg156Arg polymorphisms in XPD and prostate cancer susceptibility.

Keywords: Arg156Arg; Asp312Asn; Lys751Gln; XPD; meta-analysis; prostate cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart showing the selection process for the included studies.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The forest plot of dominant model between Asp312Asn and PCa risk.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The forest plot of dominant model between Lys751Gln and PCa risk.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The forest plot of dominant model between Arg156Arg and PCa risk.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
The funnel plot of different model between Asp312Asn and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
The funnel plot of different model between Lys751Gln and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
The funnel plot of different model between Arg156Arg and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
Figure 8.
Figure 8.
The sensitivity analysis of different model between Asp312Asn and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
Figure 9.
Figure 9.
The sensitivity analysis of different model between Lys751Gln and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
Figure 10.
Figure 10.
The sensitivity analysis of different model between Arg156Arg and PCa risk. A, Homozygote comparisons. B, Heterozygote comparisons. C, Dominant model. D, Recessive model.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(1):5–29. - PubMed
    1. Hao Q, Wei D, Zhang Y, et al. Systematic meta-analyses of gene-specific genetic association studies in prostate cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(16):22271–22284. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cao DL, Ye DW, Zhang HL, et al. A multiplex model of combining gene-based, protein-based, and metabolite-based with positive and negative markers in urine for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer. Prostate. 2011;71(7):700–710. - PubMed
    1. Chen PL, Li WT, Wang J, et al. Association between MTHFR gene polymorphisms (C677 T, A1298C) and genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Genet Mol Res. 2015;14(4):19191–19202. - PubMed
    1. Steinberg GD, Carter BS, Beaty TH, et al. Family history and the risk of prostate cancer. Prostate. 1990;17(4):337–347. - PubMed