ARTICLE
bdc.2011.1312
Auteur(s) : Kamel Rouissi1
rouissik2000@yahoo.fr,
Najla Stambouli1, Raja Marrakchi1, Mohamed R. Ben Slama2, Mohamed cherif2, Mohamed Sfaxi2, Mohamed Chebil2, Amel Benammar Elgaaied1, Slah Ouerhani3
1 University of El Manar I, Faculty of Sciences of
Tunis, Laboratory of Genetics, Immunology and Human Pathology,
2092, Tunis, Tunisia
2 Charles Nicolle Hospital, Department of Urology,
Tunis, Tunisia
3 University of El Manar I, Pasteur Institute of
Tunis, Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Haematology, Tunis,
Tunisia
Reprint: K. Rouissi
Introduction
Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the men and
the ninth most common in the women [1]. Urothelial cell carcinomas
(UCC) represent more than 90% of bladder tumors and are classified
into superficial (pTa and pT1) and muscle invasive (≥ pT2) stages.
The management of bladder cancer is dependent on tumor stage and
grade. The pTa tumors are removed by transurethral resection,
whereas invasive tumors are treated by radical cystectomy with or
without postoperative chemotherapy. Cigarette smoking is the most
important risk factor for bladder cancer, accounting for 50% of
cases in men and 35% in women [2], although the precise mechanism
by which cigarette smoking causes urinary tract cancer has yet to
be clarified. Cigarette smoke contains a range of xenobiotics,
including oxidants and free radicals, and accordingly cigarette
smoke exposure was associated with decreased levels of serum and
red blood cell folate and vitamin B12 antioxidants [3, 4]. On
the other hand, reports exist that plasma total homocysteine
concentration is higher in smokers than in non-smokers [5, 6].
These findings suggest that the combined effects of smoking with
decreased levels of folate and vitamin B12 and an increased level
of homocysteine can induce increased chromosomal damage [7]. If so,
DNA damage induced by smoking may be modulated by folate metabolic
pathway.
Central to folate metabolism are the enzymes
5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR), methionine
synthase (MTR), methionine synthase reductase (MTRR) and
thymidylate synthase (TYMS), which play important and interrelated
roles in folate pathway. The MTHFR enzyme occupies a pivotal
position, balancing the homeostasis between DNA synthesis and
methylation by catalyzing the irreversible conversion of
5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate to 5-methyltetrahydrofolate. The
MTHFR substrate, 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate, is used by
thymidylate synthase in the methylation of dUMP to dTMP, which is
the sole de novo source of thymidylate required for DNA synthesis
and repair. The MTHFR product, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate, is the
methyl group donor for the remethylation of homocysteine to
methionine catalyzed by MTR in a reaction dependent on vitamin B12
as an intermediate methyl carrier. MTR may become inactive due to
oxidation of its vitamin B12 cofactor, and restoration of MTR
activity is dependent on reductive remethylation of vitamin B12 by
MTRR. Several genetic variants in genes coding for MTHFR, MTR, MTRR
and TYMS were shown to affect directly on the function of the
expressed proteins. Among them are C677T and A1298C within MTHFR
[8-10], A2756G within MTR [11] and A66G as well as C524T within
MTRR [12]. Within the TYMS enhancer region, a polymorphic 28 bp
tandem repeat located immediately upstream of the ATG codon
initiation is known to influence TYMS transcription or translation,
and in addition a common G-to-C transversion in the second of the
TYMSER three repeats allele also affects TYMS expression [13].
Many previous case-control studies have addressed the
relationship between folate metabolic genes and risk for bladder
cancer, producing, however, conflicting results [14-16]. However,
the relationship between these risk factors, the stage and the
grade of bladder tumors was not evaluated. In view of that, we
examined in this study the combined effect of smoking and
polymorphisms in folate metabolic genes in different histological
subgroups of bladder tumors aiming at clarifying whether smoking
and genetic variations represent risk factors for the development
of tumors with high stage and grade. Efficient study design
utilizing these biomarkers should accelerate the development of
optimum bladder cancer prevention strategies.
Patients and methods
Patients
A total of 130 patients with UCC of bladder cancer were
included in the present study. Patients were recruited from the
Department of Urology at the Charles Nicole Hospital in Tunisia.
All were from North of Tunisia, 88.46% of them were men and the
mean age at diagnosis was 67.86 ± 9.16 years. These patients
were classified according to their tobacco status. The smoker
category included current smokers who smoked daily. A heavy smoker
was defined as a current smoker who had smoked 20 cigarettes or
more a day during 20 years or more. Non-consumers of tobacco were
defined as persons who had never smoked or had consumed less than
20 packs of cigarettes or 360 g of tobacco in their lifetime or
less than one cigarette per day. The intensity of tobacco use (PY)
was defined as the amount of tobacco consumed during the life of
patients (1 PY = 7300 cigarettes smoked during 1 year). It was
found that 77.69% (101/130) of patients were current smokers and
22.31% were non-tobacco consumers. It was found that 88.11%
(89/101) of smokers were heavy smokers and 53.46% (54/101) have
smoked more than 40 PY.
DNA preparation and genotyping
After giving informed consent, peripheral blood samples were
collected from all patients into tubes with EDTA at pH 8.
Genomic DNA was extracted from leukocytes using a phenol-chloroform
procedure [17]. MTHFR C677T, MTHFR A1298C, MTR A2756G, MTRR A66G,
MTRR C524T, TYMS 2R→3R and TYMS G/C polymorphisms were detected
with polymerase chain reaction/restriction fragment length
polymorphism-based approaches, as described previously
[18, 19].
Statistical analysis
The relative risks (RR) were estimated with 95% confidence
intervals (CI) at the 0.05 significance level [20]. Relative risk
was calculated using non-smoker patients with the homozygous
wild-type genotypes as reference using the software Epi Info
6.0.
Results
Tumors were staged and graded according to the criteria of the
tumor-node-metastasis classification (TNM) and the
WHO-International Society of Urological Pathology as follows: 1
CIS, 29 pTa GI, 17 pTa GII, 2 pTa GIII, 4 pT1 GI, 26 pT1 GII, 22
pT1 GIII and 29 invasive tumors (≥ pT2).
The percents of smokers developing superficial and invasive
tumors were 75.24% (76/101) and 86.20% (25/29) respectively (table 1 table 1). The comparison of these
percentages does not show a significant statistic difference
(P = 0.31), which suggested that tobacco does not appear to
be a factor affecting the bladder tumors stage. However, we have
found that patients who have smoked 20-39 PY during their lifetime
have a 1.44 fold risk for developing invasive tumors compared to
non-smokers patients (table 1).
Table 1 Distribution of superficial and invasive tumors
according to patients smoking status and to the folate metabolizing
enzyme genotypes.
|
| Tumors stage |
P |
RR (CI 95%) |
|
| Cis, pTa/pT1 |
≥ pT2 |
| |
|
| (N = 101) |
(N = 29) |
| |
| Smoking status |
|
|
| |
| Non Smokers |
25 |
4 |
- |
1* |
| Smokers |
76 |
25 |
0.31 |
- |
| 1- 19 PY |
11 |
1 |
0.96 |
- |
| 20- 39 PY |
21 |
14 |
0.04 |
1.44 (1.06-1.95) |
| ≥ 40 PY |
44 |
10 |
0.80 |
- |
| MTHFR C677T |
|
|
| - |
| CC |
49 |
11 |
- |
1* |
| CT |
46 |
14 |
0.65 |
- |
| TT |
6 |
4 |
0.25 |
- |
| MTHFR A1298C |
|
|
| |
| AA |
45 |
17 |
- |
1* |
| AC |
50 |
11 |
0.30 |
- |
| CC |
6 |
1 |
0.76 |
- |
| MTR A2756G |
|
|
| |
| AA |
49 |
19 |
- |
1* |
| AG |
50 |
10 |
0.19 |
- |
| GG |
2 |
0 |
0.94 |
- |
| MTRR A66G |
|
|
| |
| AA |
30 |
12 |
- |
1* |
| AG |
48 |
12 |
0.44 |
- |
| GG |
23 |
5 |
0.45 |
- |
| MTRR C524T |
|
|
| |
| CC |
28 |
4 |
- |
1* |
| CT |
57 |
18 |
0.27 |
- |
| TT |
16 |
7 |
0.19 |
- |
| TYMS 28-bp repeat & G/C SNP |
|
|
| |
| 3R*G/3R*G |
27 |
4 |
- |
1* |
| 3R*G/3R*C |
6 |
6 |
0.02 |
1.74 (0.97-3.12) |
| 3R*G/2R |
20 |
5 |
0.72 |
- |
| 3R*C/3R*C |
4 |
0 |
0.94 |
- |
| 3R*C/2R |
21 |
8 |
0.27 |
- |
| 2R/2R |
23 |
6 |
0.64 |
- |
1*: reference group; RR: Relative risk; CIS, pTa/pT1:
superficial tumors; ≥ pt2: invasive tumors; PY: packet years.
The distribution of altered genotypes for MTHFR, MTR and
MTRR genes between patients with superficial tumors and those
with invasive tumors does not show a significant statistical
difference (table 1). For TYMS
gene, a significant statistic difference in genotypic distribution
between patients with superficial tumors and those with invasive
tumors was detected for the TYMS 3R*G/3R*C genotype
(P = 0.02). This genotype presented a 1.74-fold increased
risk of developing invasive tumors compared to reference group
(RR = 1.74; 95% CI: 0.97-3.12). The stratification of superficial
and invasive tumors according to smoking status, MTHFR,
MTR, MTRR and TYMS genotypes does not show a
significant statistical difference (table
2 table 2).
Table 2 Stratification of the genotypes of superficial and
invasive tumors according to smoking status.
| Tobacco status |
Genotypes |
CIS; pTa/pT1 |
≥ pT2 |
P |
RR (CI 95%) |
|
| MTHFR C677T |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
CC |
12 |
1 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
CT |
12 |
3 |
0.69 |
- |
|
| TT |
1 |
0 |
0.08 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
CC |
34 |
10 |
0.41 |
- |
| N = 89 |
CT |
27 |
10 |
0.28 |
- |
|
| TT |
4 |
4 |
0.09 |
- |
|
| MTHFR A1298C |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
10 |
1 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
AC |
14 |
3 |
0.93 |
- |
|
| CC |
1 |
0 |
0.11 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
30 |
15 |
0.22 |
- |
| N = 89 |
AC |
30 |
8 |
0.64 |
- |
|
| CC |
5 |
1 |
0.74 |
- |
|
| MTR A2756G |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
13 |
3 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
AG |
12 |
1 |
0.75 |
- |
|
| GG |
0 |
0 |
| |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
29 |
16 |
0.35 |
- |
| N = 89 |
AG |
34 |
8 |
0.72 |
- |
|
| GG |
2 |
0 |
0.73 |
- |
|
| MTRR A66G |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
8 |
2 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
AG |
9 |
0 |
0.50 |
- |
|
| GG |
8 |
2 |
1 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
19 |
10 |
0.64 |
- |
| N = 89 |
AG |
32 |
11 |
0.96 |
- |
|
| GG |
14 |
3 |
0.71 |
- |
|
| MTRR C524T |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
CC |
9 |
1 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
CT |
13 |
3 |
0.96 |
- |
|
| TT |
3 |
0 |
0.50 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
CC |
14 |
3 |
0.98 |
- |
| N = 89 |
CT |
39 |
15 |
0.42 |
- |
|
| TT |
12 |
6 |
0.36 |
- |
|
| TYMS 28-bp repeat & G/C SNP |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
3R*G/3R*G |
4 |
1 |
- |
1* |
| N = 29 |
3R*G/3R*C |
1 |
0 |
0.32 |
- |
|
| 3R*G/2R |
9 |
1 |
0.78 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/3R*C |
0 |
0 |
| |
|
| 3R*C/2R |
6 |
2 |
0.63 |
- |
|
| 2R/2R |
5 |
0 |
1.00 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
3R*G/3R*G |
22 |
3 |
0.81 |
- |
| N = 89 |
3R*G/3R*C |
3 |
6 |
0.26 |
- |
|
| 3R*G/2R |
10 |
4 |
0.82 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/3R*C |
2 |
0 |
0.60 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/2R |
10 |
6 |
0.85 |
- |
|
| 2R/2R |
18 |
5 |
0.60 |
- |
1*: reference group; RR: Relative risk; CIS, pTa/pT1:
superficial tumors; ≥ pt2: invasive tumors; PY: packet years.
Among superficial tumors, 76.23% (77/101) were with low grade
(GI or GII) and 23.76% (24/101) were with high grade (GIII). More
than 81.8% (63/77) of patients with superficial low grade tumors
were smokers. This percentage was statistically different to that
reported for patients with high-grade tumors (table 3 table 3). The high frequency of smokers
in patients with superficial low-grade tumors (used as a reference
group) compared to those with high grade led to a relative risk
(RR) less than 1 (RR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.47-0.97).
Table 3 Distribution of superficial bladder cancer according to
tumors grade, patients smoking status and folate metabolizing
enzyme genotypes.
|
| Grade of superficial tumor (N = 101) |
| P |
RR (CI 95%) |
|
| I/II (N = 77) |
III (N = 24) |
| |
| Smoking status |
|
|
| |
| Non Smokers |
14 |
11 |
- |
1* |
| Smokers |
63 |
13 |
0.01 |
0.68 (0.47-0.97) |
| 1- 19 PY |
9 |
2 |
0.26 |
- |
| 20- 39 PY |
18 |
3 |
0.06 |
- |
| ≥ 40 PY |
36 |
8 |
0.04 |
0.68 (0.47-1.00) |
| MTHFR C677T |
|
|
| |
| CC |
39 |
10 |
- |
1* |
| CT |
34 |
12 |
0.68 |
- |
| TT |
4 |
2 |
0.84 |
- |
| MTHFR A1298C |
|
|
| |
| AA |
34 |
11 |
- |
1* |
| AC |
38 |
12 |
0.84 |
- |
| CC |
5 |
1 |
0.92 |
- |
| MTR A2756G |
|
|
| |
| AA |
37 |
12 |
- |
1* |
| AG |
38 |
12 |
0.85 |
- |
| GG |
2 |
0 |
0.96 |
- |
| MTRR A66G |
|
|
| |
| AA |
22 |
8 |
- |
1* |
| AG |
38 |
10 |
0.74 |
- |
| GG |
17 |
6 |
0.78 |
- |
| MTRR C524T |
|
|
| |
| CC |
24 |
4 |
- |
1* |
| CT |
43 |
14 |
0.41 |
- |
| TT |
10 |
6 |
0.16 |
- |
| TYMS 28-bp repeat & G/C SNP |
|
|
| |
| 3R*G/3R*G |
25 |
2 |
- |
1* |
| 3R*G/3R*C |
5 |
1 |
0.94 |
- |
| 3R*G/2R |
11 |
9 |
0.007 |
1.68 (1.12-2.54) |
| 3R*C/3R*C |
4 |
0 |
0.59 |
- |
| 3R*C/2R |
15 |
6 |
0.11 |
- |
| 2R/2R |
17 |
6 |
0.15 |
- |
| 3R*G/2R + 3R*C/2R + 2R/2R |
43 |
21 |
0.02 |
4.23 (1.08-16.48) |
1*: reference group; RR: Relative risk; GI/GII: low-rade
superficial tumors; GIII: high grade superficial tumors; PY: packet
years.
The comparison of MTHFR, MTR and MTRR
altered genotypes frequencies in patients with superficial low
grade to those with superficial high-grade tumors does not show a
significant statistical difference (table
3). A significant statistical differences were only
obtained for the TYMS 3R*G/2R genotype. This genotype
presented a 1.68-fold increased risk of developing high grade
tumors compared to reference group (RR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.12-2.54).
Moreover, our data reported that patients having at least one copy
of 2R allele were at high risk for developing high grade tumors
compared to reference group (P = 0.022, RR = 4.23; 95% CI:
1.08-16.48).
The stratification of superficial bladder tumors according to
their genotypes and tobacco (table 4
table 4) have showed that the MTR 2756AA genotype was over
presented in smoker patients with superficial low grade tumors
compared to those with high grade tumors (P = 0.01). The
presence of this wild genotype was associated with a protective
role against the development of superficial high-grade bladder
tumor (RR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.29-0.98).
Table 4 Stratification of genotypes of low and high-grade
superficial tumors according to smoking status.
| Tobacco status |
Genotypes |
GI, GII |
G III |
P |
RR (CI 95%) |
|
| MTHFR C677T |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
CC |
7 |
5 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
CT |
7 |
5 |
0.67 |
- |
|
| TT |
0 |
1 |
0.93 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
CC |
29 |
5 |
0.12 |
- |
| N = 65 |
CT |
22 |
5 |
0.25 |
- |
|
| TT |
3 |
1 |
1.00 |
- |
|
| MTHFR A1298C |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
6 |
4 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
AC |
8 |
6 |
0.77 |
- |
|
| CC |
0 |
1 |
0.92 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
24 |
6 |
0.39 |
- |
| N = 65 |
AC |
25 |
5 |
0.27 |
- |
|
| CC |
5 |
0 |
0.30 |
- |
|
| MTR A2756G |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
6 |
7 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
AG |
8 |
4 |
0.52 |
- |
|
| GG |
0 |
0 |
| |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
25 |
4 |
0.01 |
0.54 (0.29-0.98) |
| N = 65 |
AG |
27 |
7 |
0.06 |
- |
|
| GG |
2 |
0 |
0.50 |
- |
|
| MTRR A66G |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
AA |
6 |
2 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
AG |
4 |
5 |
0.43 |
- |
|
| GG |
4 |
4 |
0.60 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
AA |
14 |
5 |
0.68 |
- |
| N = 65 |
AG |
28 |
4 |
0.73 |
- |
|
| GG |
12 |
2 |
0.95 |
- |
|
| MTRR C524T |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
CC |
7 |
2 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
CT |
6 |
7 |
0.29 |
- |
|
| TT |
1 |
2 |
0.47 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
CC |
13 |
1 |
0.67 |
- |
| N = 65 |
CT |
33 |
6 |
1.00 |
- |
|
| TT |
8 |
4 |
0.94 |
- |
|
| TYMS 28-bp repeat & G/C SNP |
|
|
| |
| Non-smokers |
3R*G/3R*G |
3 |
1 |
- |
1* |
| N = 25 |
3R*G/3R*C |
1 |
0 |
0.40 |
- |
|
| 3R*G/2R |
4 |
5 |
0.67 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/3R*C |
0 |
0 |
| |
|
| 3R*C/2R |
3 |
3 |
0.89 |
- |
|
| 2R/2R |
3 |
2 |
0.81 |
- |
| Smokers (≥ 20 PY) |
3R*G/3R*G |
21 |
1 |
0.69 |
- |
| N = 65 |
3R*G/3R*C |
3 |
0 |
0.87 |
- |
|
| 3R*G/2R |
6 |
4 |
0.92 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/3R*C |
2 |
0 |
0.69 |
- |
|
| 3R*C/2R |
8 |
2 |
0.60 |
- |
|
| 2R/2R |
14 |
4 |
0.58 |
- |
1*: reference group; RR: Relative risk; GI/GII: low grade
superficial tumors; GIII: high grade superficial tumors; PY: packet
years.
Discussion
Urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) is a heterogeneous neoplasm that
presents as either superficial or muscle invasive at diagnosis.
Superficial low-grade tumors are characterized by frequent
recurrences. In contrast, high-grade tumors (pTa GIII and pT1 GIII)
represent a significant risk of future tumors progression and death
for the disease. Tobacco smoke is the most important exogenous risk
factor for bladder cancer [2]. A previously findings suggest that
the combined effects of smoking with decreased levels of folate and
vitamin B12 and an increased level of homocysteine can induce
increased chromosomal damage [7]. In view of that, we examined in
this study the combined effect of smoking and polymorphisms in
folate metabolic genes in different histological subgroups of
bladder tumors aiming at clarifying whether smoking and genetic
variations represent risk factors for the development of tumors
with high stage and grade.
Our data have reported that 77.69% (101/130) of patients were
current smokers and 22.31% were non-tobacco consumers. It was found
that 88.11% (89/101) of smokers were heavy smokers and 53.46%
(54/101) have smoked more than 40 PY. These results suggested the
important role of tobacco in bladder cancer development in the
Tunisian population. The distribution of patients according to
their smoking status and to the histological tumors stage, has
suggested that patients who have smoked 20-39 PY during their
lifetime have a 1.44 fold risk for developing invasive tumors
compared to non-smokers patients. However, patients who have smoked
40 PY ore more during their lifetime develop low grade but not
high-grade superficial tumors group. This finding was in
contradiction with others many studies, which have suggested that
bladder tumors in patients who smoke tend to be large, multi-focal
and demonstrate high histological grade and stage [21].
The distribution of altered genotypes for MTHFR and
MTRR genes between patients with superficial tumors and
those with invasive tumors does not show a significant statistical
difference. This results is waited because we have previously
reported for that the isolated MTHFR 677*T, MTRR 66*G and MTRR
524*T variants did not appear to influence bladder cancer
susceptibility [22]. For the MTR gene, although we have
previously found that MTR 2756*G variant increases the risk
of bladder cancer development [22], we have not reported any
association with the tumors stage and grade. As so, this gene is
considered as markers for the bladder cancer development but not
for the tumors presentation. With considering the TYMS gene,
our data have reported that patients having at least one copy of 2R
allele were at 4.23–fold increased risk for developing high-grade
tumors compared to reference group. This result appears in
contradiction with our previously reported data, which considered
that patients having the 2R variant were protected against bladder
cancer development. The mechanism by which TYMS polymorphisms
influence bladder cancer susceptibility was by their effect on gene
expression. Indeed Mandola et al. [13], have reported that
the ATG codon initiation site containing two (2R) or three (3R)
28-base pair (bp) repeats that can influence TYMS transcription or
translation. The 3R/3R genotype was shown to be associated with
increased expression of the TYMS gene and/or TS protein. In
addition, a common G-to-C transversion in the second of the three
28-bp repeats of TYMSER*3 has been identified. This single
nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) changes a critical residue in the
upstream stimulatory factor E-box consensus element, which leads to
a decrease in TYMS transcription such that TYMSER*3C has lower
activity than TYMSER*3G, but similar activity to TYMSER*2 3R/3R
genotype. The asked question was how the 2R variant was associated
in the same time with a protective role against bladder cancer
development and with advanced tumors grade? This result is
explained by equilibrium between methylation and thymidine
synthesis. Indeed; when the activity of TYMS enzyme decrease, due
to the presence of 2R variant, the methylation process is
accelerated and the oncogene were deactivated which protect against
bladder cancer development. After development of bladder tumors the
decrease of thymidine synthesis increases the risk of DNA
instability and chromosome aberration, which characterize the
advanced bladder tumors grade.
The distribution of patients developing superficial bladder
tumors according to genotypic frequencies of MTHFR,
MTRR and TYMS, smoking status and histological tumors
grade does not show a significant statistical difference. This
result suggests that genetic polymorphisms in these genes don’t
interact with tobacco to influence the histological tumors grade.
However, we have found that smoking patients harbouring the wild
genotype for MTR (MTR 2756AA) were protected against the
development of superficial high-grade tumors. This protective role
is explained by maintain of a normal DNA and protein methylation.
Indeed it was shown that variations in MTR gene, which is crucial
in the provision of methyl groups for DNA, RNA and protein
methylation, as well as in purine and pyrimidine synthesis
[23, 24] leads to decreased DNA methylation and such
insufficiency may promote carcinogenesis by inducing genomic
instability or by the derepression of proto-oncogenes [14].
Although some of the results presented in this study are novel,
the study has some limitations. Firstly, the sample size is small,
limiting the precision of the statistic analyses. Secondly, we have
not information regarding somatic altered genes such as
FGFR3 and p53, which was respectively associated to
superficial low and high-grade bladder tumors. Besides that in the
future, enlargement of sample sizes in the Tunisian population and
analysis of somatic altered genes will be essential to assess the
role that environmental factors together with the genetic factors
play as predictors of differential susceptibility to the malignancy
presentation.
Conflicts of interest: none.
References
1 RT Greenlee, MB Hill-Harmon, T Murray, M. Thun Cancer
statistics 2001 CA Cancer J Clin 2001; 51: 15-36.
2 MP Zeegers, FE Tan, E Dorant, P.A. Van Den Brandt The impact
of characteristics of cigarette smoking on urinary tract cancer
risk: a meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies Cancer 2000;
89: 630-639.
3 DM Mannino, J Mulinare, ES Ford, J. Schwartz Tobacco smoke
exposure and decreased serum and red blood cell folate levels: data
from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
Nicotine Tob Res 2003; 5: 357-362.
4 R Tungtrongchitr, P Pongpaew, M Soonthornruengyot et
al. Relationship of tobacco smoking with serum vitamin B-12,
folic acid and haematological indices in healthy adults Public
Health Nutr 2003; 6: 675-681.
5 H Lwin, T Yokoyama, C Date, N Yoshiike, Y Kokubo, H. Tanaka
Are the associations between life-style related factors and plasma
total homocysteine concentration different according to
polymorphism of 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene
(C677T MTHFR)? A cross-sectional study in a Japanese rural
population J Epidemiol 2002; 12: 126-135.
6 SM Saw, JM Yuan, CN Ong et al. Genetic, dietary and
other lifestyle determinants of plasma homocysteine concentrations
in middle-aged and older Chinese men and women in Singapore Am J
Clin Nutr 2001; 73: 232-239.
7 ATL Chen, JA Reidy, JL Annest, TK Welty, H.G. Zhou Increased
chromosome fragility as a consequence of blood folate levels,
smoking status and coffer consumption Environ Mol Mutagen
1989; 13: 319-324.
8 P Frosst, HJ Blom, R Milos et al. A candidate genetic
risk factor for vascular disease: a common mutation in
methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase Nat Genet 1995; 10:
111-113.
9 I Weisberg, P Tran, B Christensen, S Sibani, R. Rozen A second
genetic polymorphism in methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR)
associated with decreased enzyme activity Mol Genet Metab
1998; 64: 169-172.
10 NM Vander Put, F Gabreels, EM Stevens et al. A second
common mutation in the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene: an
additional risk factor for neural-tube defects? Am J Hum
Genet 1998; 62: 1044-1051.
11 DL Harmon, DC Shields, JV Woodside et al. Methionine
synthase D919G polymorphism is a significant but modest determinant
of circulating homocysteine concentrations Genet Epidemiol
1999; 17: 298-309.
12 H Olteanu, T Munson, R. Banerjee Differences in the
efficiency of reductive activation of methionine synthase and
exogenous electron acceptors between the common polymorphic
variants of human methionine synthase reductase Biochemistry
2002; 41: 13378-13385.
13 MV Mandola, J Stoehlmacher, S Muller-Weeks et al. A
novel single nucleotide polymorphism within the 5′ tandem repeat
polymorphism of the thymidylate synthase gene abolishes USF-1
binding and alters transcriptional activity Cancer Res 2003;
63: 2898-2904.
14 BT Heijmans, JM Boer, HE Suchiman et al. A common
variant of the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene
(1p36) is associated with an increased risk of cancer
Cancer Res 2003; 63: 1249-1253.
15 LE Moore, JK Wiencke, MN Bates, S Zheng, OA Rey, A.H. Smith
Investigation of genetic polymorphisms and smoking in a bladder
cancer case-control study in Argentina Cancer Lett 2004;
211: 199-207.
16 S Ouerhani, E Oliveira, R Marrakchi et al.
Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase and methionine synthase
polymorphisms and risk of bladder cancer in a Tunisian population
Cancer Genet Cytogen 2007; 176: 48-53.
17 J Sambrook, EF Fritsch, T. Maniatis Molecular cloning: a
Laboratory Manual 2nd edition 1989; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Press Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
18 MF Paz, S Avila, MF Fraga et al. Germ-line variants in
methyl-group metabolisms genes and susceptibility to DNA
methylation in normal tissues and human primary tumors Cancer
Res 2002; 62: 4519-4524.
19 E Oliveira, S Alves, S Quental et al. The MTHFR C677T
and A1298C polymorphisms and susceptibility to childhood acute
lymphoblastic leukemia in Portugal J Pediatr Hematol Oncol
2005; 27: 425-429.
20 TW O’Gorman, R.F. Woolson The effect of category choice on
the odds ratio and several measures of association in case-control
studies Commun Stat 1993; 22: 1157-1171.
21 IM Thompson, M Peek, F.R. Rodriguez The impact of cigarette
smoking on stage, grade and number of recurrences of transitional
cell carcinoma of the bladder J Urol 1987; 137: 401-403.
22 K Rouissi, S Ouerhani, E Oliveira et al. Polymorphisms
in one-carbon metabolism pathway genes and risk for bladder cancer
in a Tunisian population Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2009; 195:
43-53.
23 D. Rosenblatt Clinically important genes:
methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase Clin Invest Med 2001;
24: 56-59.
24 K Robien, C.M. Ulrich 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate
reductase polymorphisms and leukemia risk: a HuGE mini-review Am
J Epidemiol 2003; 157: 571-582.
|