Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative assessment of the association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk

  • Published:
Molecular Biology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies investigating the association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk reported controversial results. To quantify the strength of association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk, we performed this meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Embase and Wangfang databases for studies relating the association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk. We used the pooled odds ratios (ORs) with their 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) to assess the association. Finally, data were available from a total of 16 case–control studies including a total of 5, 545 subjects (2,345 cases and 3,200 controls). Meta-analysis of all 16 studies showed TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism was not associated with bladder cancer risk (All P values were more than 0.10). Subgroup analyses by ethnicity showed that TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism contributed to bladder cancer risk in East Asians in three genetic models (For Pro vs. Arg, Fixed-effects OR 1.18, 95 % CI 1.05–1.32; For ProPro vs. ArgArg, Fixed-effects OR 1.40, 95 % CI 1.11–1.77; For ProPro vs. ArgPro/ArgArg, Fixed-effects OR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.07–1.62). However, there was no significant association in Caucasians and the others (All P values were more than 0.05). Heterogeneity analyses suggested ethnicity was the major sources of heterogeneity. Thus, meta-analyses of available data suggest the Pro variant of TP53 Arg72Pro contributes to bladder cancer risk in East Asians. Besides, TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism may have race-specific effects on bladder cancer risk and further studies are needed to elucidate this possible effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2012) Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 62:10–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kaufman DS, Shipley WU, Feldman AS (2009) Bladder cancer. Lancet 374:239–249

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Taioli E, Raimondi S (2005) Genetic susceptibility to bladder cancer. Lancet 366:610–612

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chipuk JE, Bouchier-Hayes L, Kuwana T et al (2005) PUMA couples the nuclear and cytoplasmic proapoptotic function of p53. Science 309:1732–1735

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Riley T, Sontag E, Chen P et al (2008) Transcriptional control of human p53-regulated genes. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 9:402–412

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dumont P, Leu JI, Della Pietra AC III et al (2003) The codon 72 polymorphic variants of p53 have markedly different apoptotic potential. Nat Genet 33:357–365

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Whibley C, Pharoah PD, Hollstein M (2009) p53 polymorphisms: cancer implications. Nat Rev Cancer 9:95–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mabrouk I, Baccouche S, El-Abed R et al (2003) No evidence of correlation between p53 codon 72 polymorphism and risk of bladder or breast carcinoma in Tunisian patients. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1010:764–770

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ye Y, Yang H, Grossman HB et al (2008) Genetic variants in cell cycle control pathway confer susceptibility to bladder cancer. Cancer 112:2467–2474

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Srivastava P, Jaiswal PK, Singh V et al (2010) Role of p53 gene polymorphism and bladder cancer predisposition in northern India. Cancer Biomark 8:21–28

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Pandith AA, Shah ZA, Khan NP et al (2010) Role of TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism in urinary bladder cancer predisposition and predictive impact of proline related genotype in advanced tumors in an ethnic Kashmiri population. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 203:263–268

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuroda Y, Tsukino H, Nakao H et al (2003) p53 Codon 72 polymorphism and urothelial cancer risk. Cancer Lett 189:77–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Soulitzis N, Sourvinos G, Dokianakis DN et al (2002) p53 codon 72 polymorphism and its association with bladder cancer. Cancer Lett 179:175–183

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang R, Chen W, Zhang W et al (2011) Genetic polymorphisms of p53 codon 72 and bladder cancer susceptibility: a hospital-based case-control study. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 15:337–341

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wu WJ, Kakehi Y, Habuchi T et al (1995) Allelic frequency of p53 gene codon 72 polymorphism in urologic cancers. Jpn J Cancer Res 86:730–736

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Biros E, Kalina I, Salagovic J et al (2000) p53 single nucleotide polymorphisms and bladder cancer. Neoplasma 47:303–306

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Horikawa Y, Nadaoka J, Saito M et al (2008) Clinical implications of the MDM2 SNP309 and p53 Arg72Pro polymorphisms in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Oncol Rep 20:49–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lin HY, Huang CH, Yu TJ et al (2012) p53 codon 72 polymorphism as a progression index for bladder cancer. Oncol Rep 27:1193–1199

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chung CJ, Huang CJ, Pu YS et al (2008) Polymorphisms in cell cycle regulatory genes, urinary arsenic profile and urothelial carcinoma. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 232:203–209

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lin HY, Huang CH, Yu TJ et al (2011) p53 codon 72 polymorphism was associated with vulnerability, progression, but not prognosis of bladder cancer in a Taiwanese population: an implication of structural equation modeling to manage the risks of bladder cancer. Urol Int 86:355–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Santos LE, Guilhen AC, de Andrade RA et al (2011) The role of TP53 PRO47SER and ARG72PRO single nucleotide polymorphisms in the susceptibility to bladder cancer. Urol Oncol 29:291–294

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Chen WC, Tsai FJ, Wu JY et al (2000) Distributions of p53 codon 72 polymorphism in bladder cancer–proline form is prominent in invasive tumor. Urol Res 28:293–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Toruner GA, Ucar A, Tez M et al (2001) P53 codon 72 polymorphism in bladder cancer–no evidence of association with increased risk or invasiveness. Urol Res 29:393–395

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Attia J, Thakkinstian A, D’Este C (2003) Meta-analyses of molecular association studies: methodologic lessons for genetic epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol 56:297–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Salanti G, Amountza G, Ntzani EE et al (2005) Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium in genetic association studies: an empirical evaluation of reporting, deviations, and power. Eur J Hum Genet 13:840–848

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sayed-Tabatabaei FA, Houwing-Duistermaat JJ, van Duijn CM et al (2003) Angiotensin-converting enzyme gene polymorphism and carotid artery wall thickness: a meta-analysis. Stroke 34:1634–1639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zintzaras E, Raman G, Kitsios G et al (2008) Angiotensin-converting enzyme insertion/deletion gene polymorphic variant as a marker of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 168:1077–1089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22:719–748

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ et al (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cochran WG (1954) The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 10:101–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thompson SG, Higgins J (2002) How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat Med 21:1559–1573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Burchard EG, Ziv E, Coyle N et al (2003) The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. N Engl J Med 348:1170–1175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bhopal R (2004) Glossary of terms relating to ethnicity and race: for reflection and debate. J Epidemiol Community Health 58:441–445

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Stuck AE, Rubenstein LZ, Wieland D (1998) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Asymmetry detected in funnel plot was probably due to true heterogeneity. BMJ 316:469

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M et al (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Chen YC, Xu L, Guo YL et al (2004) Polymorphisms in GSTT1 and p53 and urinary transitional cell carcinoma in south-western Taiwan: a preliminary study. Biomarkers 9:386–394

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Gao W, Romkes M, Zhong S et al (2010) Genetic polymorphisms in the DNA repair genes XPD and XRCC1, p53 gene mutations and bladder cancer risk. Oncol Rep 24:257–262

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Jiang DK, Ren WH, Yao L et al (2010) Meta-analysis of association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk. Urology 76(765):e761–e767

    Google Scholar 

  40. Vousden KH, Lane DP (2007) p53 in health and disease. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:275–283

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ioannidis JP, Patsopoulos NA, Evangelou E (2007) Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ 335:914–916

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Shanghai First People’s Hospital, Medical College of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 100 Haining Road, Shanghai, 200080, China

    Zhi-Hong Liu & Er-Dun Bao

Authors
  1. Zhi-Hong Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Er-Dun Bao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Er-Dun Bao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, ZH., Bao, ED. Quantitative assessment of the association between TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and bladder cancer risk. Mol Biol Rep 40, 2389–2395 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-012-2319-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-012-2319-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation