Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Association between the polymorphisms in XPG gene and gastric cancer susceptibility in Chinese populations

A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis

Xia, Jun MDa,b,c; Sun, Rulin PhDa,b,d,*

Section Editor(s): Ding., Jianxun

doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008213
Research Article: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Open

Background: Several previous studies were carried out on the association between xeroderma pigmentosum group G (XPG) gene polymorphisms (including rs873601 G>A, rs2094258 C>T, rs2296147 T>C, and rs751402 C>T) and the risk of gastric cancer in Chinese populations. However, their conclusions were not consistent. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed by us to investigate the association between the 4 potentially functional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of XPG gene and gastric cancer risk.

Methods: The eligible literatures were identified through PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan fang databases up to July 2017. Finally, 5 studies for rs873601, 7 studies for rs2094258, 4 studies for rs2296147, and 8 studies for rs751402 were used for the current meta-analysis.

Results: Of the 4 included SNPs, only rs751402 was showed to be associated with the risk of gastric cancer [C vs T, odds ratio (OR) = 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04–1.29; CC + CT vs TT, OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.00–1.52; CC vs CT + TT, OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.05–1.27; CC vs TT, OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.06–1.72; CC vs CT, OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02–1.25].

Conclusion: The current meta-analysis demonstrated that the XPG gene polymorphism rs751402 was associated with increased susceptibility to gastric cancer in Chinese populations. However, studies with a larger number of subjects among different ethnic groups are needed to further validate the results.

aClinical Laboratory Center, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital

bPeople's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College

cKey Laboratory of Tumor Molecular Diagnosis and Individualized Medicine of Zhejiang Province

dKey Laboratory of Gastroenterology of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, P. R. China.

Correspondence: Rulin Sun, Clinical Laboratory Center, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Shangtang Road 158, 310014 Hangzhou, Zhejiang, P. R. China (e-mail: sunrulin@hmc.edu.cn).

Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval, ERCC5 = excision repair cross complementing group 5, HWE = Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, MAF = minor allele frequency, NER = nucleotide excision repair, OR = odds ratio, SNP = single nucleotide polymorphism, XPG = xeroderma pigmentosum group G.

Funding: This work was supported by the Outstanding Young Personnel Research Fund of Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (No. ZRY2016C004).

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives License 4.0, which allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to the author. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0

Received May 5, 2017

Received in revised form July 29, 2017

Accepted August 17, 2017

Back to Top | Article Outline

1 Introduction

Gastric cancer is always companied with high mortality. According to the statistics, the incidence rate of gastric cancer is the highest in Eastern Asia including China.[1,2] Gastric carcinogenesis is a multifactor process involved in lifestyle, environmental factor, and host genetics.[3] The relationship between the former 2 factors and gastric cancer risk has been already well known.[4,5] Genetic susceptibility attracts increasing attention in recent years.[6–11]

In humans, DNA repair system plays a critical role in maintaining genome stability, which prevents carcinogenesis.[12] Nucleotide excision repair (NER) has been identified as a major DNA repair pathway.[13] One of the rate-limiting proteins in the NER mechanism is xeroderma pigmentosum group G (XPG).[14] The protein, also named the excision repair cross complementing group 5 (ERCC5), is an endonuclease. The endonuclease could cut the damaged DNA at the lesion during DNA repair process.[15] Therefore, genetic variations of XPG may affect DNA repair capacity. And it could partly explain why certain individuals have increased susceptibility to malignancies compared with others.[16]

Recently, several studies have explored the association between the polymorphisms in XPG gene (including rs873601 G>A, rs2094258 C>T, rs2296147 T>C, and rs751402 C>T) and gastric cancer risk in Chinese populations. However, the conclusions in these studies were controversial.[16–26]

To clarify the association between these single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and gastric cancer risk in Chinese populations, we performed this meta-analysis of eleven published studies. Meanwhile, we will learn the roles of these SNPs in gastric carcinogenesis and illustrate the possible reasons for these conflicting results. All of the original regions in these studies were from China and no other ethnicities or regions existed.

Back to Top | Article Outline

2 Methods

2.1 Search strategy

The potentially relevant literatures were searched in PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan fang databases up to July 2017. The search terms were “gastric cancer,” “stomach cancer,” “xeroderma pigmentosum group G,” “XPG,” “excision repair cross complementing group 5,” “ERCC5,” “polymorphism,” “SNP,” “rs873601,” “rs2094258,” “rs2296147,” and “rs751402.” Furthermore, all references of the retrieved eligible studies were examined for additionally relevant publications.

Back to Top | Article Outline

2.2 Inclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for studies were as follows: evaluating the association between the SNPs of XPG gene and gastric cancer risk in Chinese populations; case–control study; and available data including the phenotype or allele frequencies of the SNPs of XPG gene in both cases and controls. More than that, unpublished articles, abstracts from conferences, case reports, and reviews were excluded.

Back to Top | Article Outline

2.3 Data extraction

Data including the following information were collected from each eligible study: the first author's name, year of publication, region and ethnicity of the sample population, the sample sizes in case and control groups, the distribution of phenotype, and minor allele frequency (MAF). The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of individual studies.

Back to Top | Article Outline

2.4 Statistical analysis

Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in the control group of each study was examined. The association between SNP and gastric cancer risk was assessed by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) in 5 genetic models, including allelic model, recessive model, dominant model, additive model, and heterozygous comparison model. We pooled these ORs using fixed or random effect model according to heterogeneity. The Chi-square-based Q test and I2 index were used to assess the presence of statistical heterogeneity. If P < .10 for the Q test or I2 > 50%, significant heterogeneity between studies existed and the random-effect model was conducted. Otherwise, the fixed-effect model was applied. To validate the stability of the pooled results and identify the sources of heterogeneity, sensitive analysis was carried out. Moreover, the publication bias among studies was evaluated by both Begg test and Egger test. The false-positive report probability (FPRP) analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) are performed to confirm the results in this meta-analysis. All statistical tests were performed using STATA software, version 11.0 (STATA Corp., College Station, TX).

Back to Top | Article Outline

2.5 Ethical review

The current meta-analysis was performed on the base of previous studies. Thus, the ethical approval was not required.

Back to Top | Article Outline

3 Results

3.1 Study selection and characteristics

The study selection process in this meta-analysis is shown in Fig. 1. A total of 97 studies were found in the initial search (PubMed: 40, Embase: 18, Web of Science: 19, CNKI: 16, and Wan fang: 4). Of these, 29 studies were duplicated. Therefore, 68 articles were retrieved based on the search criteria. Among these studies, 2 review articles, 2 abstracts from conferences, and 53 irrelevant studies were excluded. Finally, the remaining eleven studies were selected and the data in them were extracted.[16–26] Of them, 3 studies were medium quality and the other studies were high quality (Table 1). The genotype and allele frequencies distribution of XPG gene polymorphisms in all studies are listed in Table 2. However, phenotype distribution of rs2296147 in Yang et al's study[25] and rs751402 in Guo et al's study[21] departed from HWE (Table 2). Their data were excluded and not used for further meta-analysis. Therefore, 5 studies for rs873601, 7 studies for rs2094258, 4 studies for rs2296147, and 8 studies for rs751402 were used for the final meta-analysis.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 2

Back to Top | Article Outline

3.2 Meta-analysis results

For rs873601 and rs2296147, no significant heterogeneity was observed in 5 genetic models, and the fixed-effect model was used to calculate the ORs and 95% CIs (Table 3). We found that rs873601 was significantly associated with the increased gastric cancer risk in allelic, recessive, and additive models. However, no obvious association between rs873601 and gastric cancer susceptibility was detected in dominant model or heterozygous model (Table 3 and Fig. 2). Furthermore, our data indicated that rs2296147 was significantly associated with the elevated risk of gastric cancer in recessive model, but not in other models (Table 3 and Fig. 3).

Table 3

Table 3

Figure 2

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 3

For rs2094258, the significant heterogeneity was present in additive model. Therefore, the random-effect model was used in this genetic model and the fixed-effect model was used for other genetic models. No association between rs2094258 and gastric cancer susceptibility was found using the 5 genetic models in this meta-analysis (Table 3 and Fig. 4).

Figure 4

Figure 4

For rs751402, the heterogeneity in dominant and heterozygous models was not statistically significant, and the fixed-effect model was selected. Meanwhile, the random-effect model was used for other genetic models. Our data showed that rs751402 was associated with the increased susceptibility to gastric cancer in all genetic models (Table 3 and Fig. 5).

Figure 5

Figure 5

Back to Top | Article Outline

3.3 Heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses

Meta-regression was performed for rs2094258 and rs751402 to explore the source of heterogeneity. The publication year was considered as possible covariate. However, the result indicated that publication year was not the main factor responsible for the heterogeneity in any genetic model (Table 4).

Table 4

Table 4

Sensitivity analysis showed that the pooled ORs for rs2094258 were not considerably affected by omitting any single study in the 5 genetic models (Table 5). However, for rs873601 and rs2296147, certain study included in this meta-analysis might influence the whole results (Table 5). More than that, after omitting any single study for rs751402, the result of the SNP was stable in allelic and dominant models, but not in other genetic models (Table 5).

Table 5

Table 5

Table 5

Table 5

Back to Top | Article Outline

3.4 Publication bias

For rs751402, the publication bias existed in recessive and additive models, but not in other genetic models. No obvious publication bias was obtained in any genetic model for the other 3 SNPs (Table 6).

Table 6

Table 6

Back to Top | Article Outline

3.5 False-positive report probability analysis and trial sequential analysis

The false-positive report probability analysis and trial sequential analysis were performed for the results of rs751402. All significant findings remained significant at a prior probability of .1 and the FPRP values were less than .20 with the exception of the recessive genetic model of rs751402 C>T (Table 7). More than that, our data indicated that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary, suggesting that the sample size was sufficient and no further analysis was required to confirm the results of rs751402 in allelic, dominant, addictive, and heterozygous models (Fig. 6). In recessive genetic model, the cumulative Z-curve crossed the conventional threshold value, but it did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary or the required information size line.

Table 7

Table 7

Figure 6

Figure 6

Back to Top | Article Outline

4 Discussion

As we all known, stomach is always exposed to various endogenous and exogenous mutagens. If the capability of DNA repair is insufficient during the process, stomach cells will fail to repair the acquired DNA damage. DNA mutations will accumulate, and eventually gastric cancer is more likely to occur.[16] Therefore, DNA repair system plays a critical role in maintaining genome stability, which prevents gastric carcinogenesis.[12]

XPG has been demonstrated to play an important role in DNA repair system.[13,14] The 1186 amino-acid protein encoded by XPG gene functions as a structure-specific endonuclease involved in 2 incision steps, which are critical to correct the excision repair deficiency.[27,28] During the process of DNA repair, the DNA at the 3′ terminus could be cut by the endonuclease via the amino acids located at the N-terminus of XPG protein.[15,29] Therefore, the protein is critical to elimination of the damaged DNA.[30]

Genetic variations of XPG may lead to emergence of the corresponding mutated protein, resulting in alteration of DNA repair capacity. Therefore, compared with others, certain individuals carrying more XPG variations have the increased susceptibility to gastric cancer.[16]

Several studies have showed that XPG gene polymorphism is significantly associated with not only the risk of cancer but also the efficacy of chemotherapy in cancer patients. For example, platinum-based chemotherapeutics is the most common regimens for various cancers. To today, XPG gene polymorphism has been demonstrated to influence the efficacy of chemotherapy in many types of cancers, such as, nonsmall cell lung cancer,[31,32] osteosarcoma cancer,[33–35] and ovarian cancer.[36] Additionally, certain leukemia subline is resistant to F11782, a novel dual catalytic inhibitor of topoisomerases with DNA repair-inhibitory properties. Further research indicated that NER activity was decreased 3-fold in these cells companied with a decreased (67%) level of XPG.[37]

Thus far, several published studies have focused on the association between XPG gene polymorphisms (including rs873601, rs2094258, rs2296147, and rs751402) and gastric cancer susceptibility in Chinese populations.[16–26] However, the conclusions in these literatures were not consistent or even contradictory, which might be due to the relatively small sample size in a single study. To resolve this controversy, we performed the current meta-analysis.

Our results indicated that no association between rs2094258 and gastric cancer risk was observed. Although rs873601 and rs2296147 were associated with high gastric cancer risk in certain genetic models, these results should nonetheless be applied cautiously due to the instability. Additionally, our data showed that rs751402 was associated with increased susceptibility to gastric cancer in allelic and dominant models. The results of rs751402 in allelic and dominant models were robust. And no evidence indicated that obvious asymmetry for the 2 models existed. The false-positive report probability analysis and trial sequential analysis of the results of rs751402 suggested that the sample size was sufficient and most of these results are reliable. Therefore, no further analysis was required to confirm the results of rs751402 with the exception of the results in recessive genetic model.

The data in our study showed that the rs751402 C>T was associated with high risk of gastric cancer in Chinese populations. On the one hand, it suggests the clinicians that the individuals with T allele of rs751402 may have a high susceptibility to gastric cancer in Chinese populations. Therefore, the screening for gastric cancer in these individuals may be more important. And it is good for the early detection and treatment of gastric cancer. On the other hand, it suggests researchers that the cells with T allele of rs751402 may be more likely to lead to cancer. The underlying mechanism needs further research and the relevant study may provide a clue for gastric cancer prevention.

All of the studies included in this meta-analysis met our inclusion criteria. In spite of these, several limitations that exist in the current meta-analysis have to be acknowledged. First, some valuable information, involved in gastric carcinogenesis, from individual participants was missing in our study, such as occupation, physical activity, local environmental factor, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Second, our analysis was performed with only Chinese populations. Therefore, it is unknown whether the results will extend to other populations. Third, we carried out meta-regression considering only publication year without other factors. Last, certain obvious publication bias was detected.

Despite these limitations, the meta-analysis still provides new insights into the relationship of XPG gene and the occurrence of gastric cancer. A part of the research results from the previous studies included in the current meta-analysis were in accordance with our results. However, the numbers of studies and subjects were relatively small in this meta-analysis, which might reduce the statistical power for identifying the potential association between these XPG gene polymorphisms and gastric cancer susceptibility. A larger study should be performed to confirm the present negative results.

In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that rs751402, but not rs873601, rs2094258, or rs2296147, was associated with gastric cancer risk. These results suggest that the SNP has the potential to be the biomarker for susceptibility to gastric cancer. However, large-scale studies among different ethnic groups with more detailed individual information are needed to validate our conclusion.

Back to Top | Article Outline

References

[1]. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:87–108.
[2]. Hu Z, Ajani JA, Wei Q. Molecular epidemiology of gastric cancer: current status and future prospects. Gastrointest Cancer Res 2007;1:12–9.
[3]. Lochhead P, El-Omar EM. Gastric cancer. Br Med Bull 2008;85:87–100.
[4]. Kelley JR, Duggan JM. Gastric cancer epidemiology and risk factors. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:1–9.
[5]. Holcombe C. Helicobacter pylori: the African enigma. Gut 1992;33:429–31.
[6]. Wang LD, Zhou FY, Li XM, et al. Genome-wide association study of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in Chinese subjects identifies susceptibility loci at PLCE1 and C20orf54. Nat Genet 2010;42:759–63.
[7]. Shi Y, Hu Z, Wu C, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility loci for non-cardia gastric cancer at 3q13.31 and 5p13.1. Nat Genet 2011;43:1215–8.
[8]. Saeki N, Sakamoto H, Yoshida T. Mucin 1 gene (MUC1) and gastric-cancer susceptibility. Int J Mol Sci 2014;15:7958–73.
[9]. Saeki N, Ono H, Sakamoto H, et al. Genetic factors related to gastric cancer susceptibility identified using a genome-wide association study. Cancer Sci 2013;104:1–8.
[10]. Jin G, Ma H, Wu C, et al. Genetic variants at 6p21.1 and 7p15.3 are associated with risk of multiple cancers in Han Chinese. Am J Hum Genet 2012;91:928–34.
[11]. Abnet CC, Freedman ND, Hu N, et al. A shared susceptibility locus in PLCE1 at 10q23 for gastric adenocarcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Nat Genet 2010;42:764–7.
[12]. Li C, Wang LE, Wei Q. DNA repair phenotype and cancer susceptibility—a mini review. Int J Cancer 2009;124:999–1007.
[13]. Wood RD, Mitchell M, Sgouros J, et al. Human DNA repair genes. Science 2001;291:1284–9.
[14]. Cleaver JE. Common pathways for ultraviolet skin carcinogenesis in the repair and replication defective groups of xeroderma pigmentosum. J Dermatol Sci 2000;23:1.
[15]. Clarkson SG. The XPG story. Biochimie 2003;85:1113–21.
[16]. Duan Z, He C, Gong Y, et al. Promoter polymorphisms in DNA repair gene ERCC5 and susceptibility to gastric cancer in Chinese. Gene 2012;511:274–9.
[17]. Zhou RM, Niu CX, Wang N, et al. XPG gene polymorphisms and the risk of gastric cardia adenocarcinoma. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2016;20:432–7.
[18]. Yang LQ, Zhang Y, Sun HF. Investigation on ERCC5 genetic polymorphisms and the development of gastric cancer in a Chinese population. Genet Mol Res 2016;15: doi: 10.4238/gmr.15038364.
[19]. Lu JJ, Zhang HQ, Mai P, et al. Lack of association between ERCC5 gene polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk in a Chinese population. Genet Mol Res 2016;15: doi: 10.4238/gmr.15027779.
[20]. Li RJ, Li M, Liu GJ, et al. Association between ERCC5 gene polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk in a Chinese population. Genet Mol Res 2016;15: doi: 10.4238/gmr.15017510.
[21]. Guo BW, Yang L, Zhao R, et al. Association between ERCC5 gene polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk. Genet Mol Res 2016;15: doi: 10.4238/gmr.15027828.
[22]. Feng YB, Fan DQ, Yu J, et al. Association between XPG gene polymorphisms and development of gastric cancer risk in a Chinese population. Genet Mol Res 2016;15: doi: 10.4238/gmr.15027877.
[23]. Chen YZ, Guo F, Sun HW, et al. Association between XPG polymorphisms and stomach cancer susceptibility in a Chinese population. J Cell Mol Med 2016;20:903–8.
[24]. He J, Qiu LX, Wang MY, et al. Polymorphisms in the XPG gene and risk of gastric cancer in Chinese populations. Hum Genet 2012;131:1235–44.
[25]. Yang WG, Zhang SF, Chen JW, et al. SNPs of excision repair cross complementing group 5 and gastric cancer risk in Chinese populations. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012;13:6269–72.
[26]. Hua RX, Zhuo ZJ, Zhu J, et al. Association between genetic variants in the XPG gene and gastric cancer risk in a Southern Chinese population. Aging (Albany NY) 2016;8:3311–20.
[27]. Mudgett JS, MacInnes MA. Isolation of the functional human excision repair gene ERCC5 by intercosmid recombination. Genomics 1990;8:623–33.
[28]. Shiomi T, Harada Y, Saito T, et al. An ERCC5 gene with homology to yeast RAD2 is involved in group G xeroderma pigmentosum. Mutat Res 1994;314:167–75.
[29]. Scherly D, Nouspikel T, Corlet J, et al. Complementation of the DNA repair defect in xeroderma pigmentosum group G cells by a human cDNA related to yeast RAD2. Nature 1993;363:182–5.
[30]. Fagbemi AF, Orelli B, Scharer OD. Regulation of endonuclease activity in human nucleotide excision repair. DNA Repair (Amst) 2011;10:722–9.
[31]. Sun X, Li F, Sun N, et al. Polymorphisms in XRCC1 and XPG and response to platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 2009;65:230–6.
[32]. Zhang T, Sun J, Lv M, et al. XPG is predictive gene of clinical outcome in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with platinum drug therapy. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:701–5.
[33]. Graf N, Ang WH, Zhu G, et al. Role of endonucleases XPF and XPG in nucleotide excision repair of platinated DNA and cisplatin/oxaliplatin cytotoxicity. Chembiochem 2011;12:1115–23.
[34]. Biason P, Hattinger CM, Innocenti F, et al. Nucleotide excision repair gene variants and association with survival in osteosarcoma patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Pharmacogenomics J 2012;12:476–83.
[35]. Bai SB, Chen HX, Bao YX, et al. Predictive impact of common variations in DNA repair genes on clinical outcome of osteosarcoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:3677–80.
[36]. Zhang W, Wu FX, Wang Q, et al. Effect of XPG down-regulation gene expression towards the proliferation of epithelial ovarian cancer cells and its chemosensitivity to platinum. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 2012;47:286–91.
[37]. Kruczynski A, Barret JM, Van Hille B, et al. Decreased nucleotide excision repair activity and alterations of topoisomerase IIalpha are associated with the in vivo resistance of a P388 leukemia subline to F11782, a novel catalytic inhibitor of topoisomerases I and II. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:3156–68.
Keywords:

Chinese; gastric cancer; polymorphism; susceptibility; XPG

Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.