Disease Markers

Disease Markers / 2019 / Article
Special Issue

Developmental Gene Markers in Tumor Pathogenesis and Progression

View this Special Issue

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 3949343 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3949343

Qin Li, Peng Zhang, Yanyun Wang, Yan Zhang, Kai Li, Yaping Song, Min Su, Bin Zhou, Lin Zhang, "Association between AXIN1 Gene Polymorphisms and Bladder Cancer in Chinese Han Population", Disease Markers, vol. 2019, Article ID 3949343, 8 pages, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3949343

Association between AXIN1 Gene Polymorphisms and Bladder Cancer in Chinese Han Population

Academic Editor: Monica Cantile
Received07 Aug 2018
Revised28 Jan 2019
Accepted07 Feb 2019
Published15 Apr 2019


Background. Previous evidence has indicated that the reduction of axis inhibition protein 1 (AXIN1) expression is related with the poor differentiation of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the potential association between AXIN1 and bladder cancer (BC) is unknown. We aimed to initially explore the relevance of AXIN1 gene polymorphisms (rs12921862 C/A, rs1805105 T/C, and rs370681 C/T) and BC. Methods. Three hundred and sixteen BC patients and 419 healthy controls had been enrolled. Polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method was used for genotyping three tag single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of AXIN1. The SNPstats online analysis software and SPSS software were used for statistical analysis. Results. Our data revealed that three tag SNPs were associated with an increased risk of BC (rs12921862: , OR (3.13-6.81); rs1805105: , OR (1.00-1.82); and rs370681: , OR (1.15-2.10)). For rs12921862, A allele was an independently protective factor which correlated with a better prognosis in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients (, OR (0.01-0.84)). Stratification analysis demonstrated that rs370681 polymorphism was related with high-grade bladder cancer (, OR (1.04-3.23)). Conclusion. The AXIN1 gene polymorphisms might implicate in BC risk, and rs12921862 could be a potential forecasting factor for prognosis of BC patients.

1. Introduction

Bladder cancer (BC) was ranked as the ninth most common cancer by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2012. It is related to thrice as much higher morbidity and mortality in the developed countries compared to the developing regions, and more than 75% of the cases occur in men. In 2012, 165000 deaths and 429000 new cases were recorded worldwide, of which 26820 deaths and 55486 new cases were in China, resulting in an incidence rate of 3/100000 and accounting for a large fraction of BC in East Asia (37491 deaths and 85451 cases) [1]. Around 80% of BC patients have the non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), whereas muscle-invasive bladder cancers (MIBC) account for only 20% of the cases, although they are responsible for a large number of deaths [24].

Smoking is the most significant risk factor of BC, accounting for an estimated 50% of all cases, followed by occupational exposure to chemical carcinogens, e.g., industrial paints, dyes, metals, and petroleum products [35]. Increasing evidences in recent years have suggested a genetic predisposition towards cancer susceptibility. For instance, Gu et al. found an association between the N-acetyl transferase 2 (NAT2) slow acetylator phenotype and a significantly higher risk of BC in smokers [6]. Moreover, the risk of BC is twofold higher in first-degree relatives of BC patients [4], indicating that several genetic factors could play a role in the initiation and progression of BC.

The Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway is one of the fundamental pathways regulating cell proliferation, polarity, and lineage differentiation during embryonic development and tissue homeostasis, and mutations in its components are often involved in birth defects, cancer, and other diseases [7, 8]. Studies have directly linked the Wnt signaling pathway to the development of BC [911]. Mao et al. demonstrated that activating the Wnt pathway could accelerate the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), invasion, and migration of BC cells in vitro [12]. In addition, the inhibition of Wnt signaling suppressed BC xenograft growth in nude mice [13]. Canonical Wnt signaling is regulated by the degradation of the AXIN1-mediated β-catenin destruction complex. Axis inhibition protein 1 (AXIN1) is a multidomain scaffold protein that regulates the levels and localization of β-catenin during Wnt pathway activation and is involved in the genesis and progression of diseases like atrial septal defect, cryptorchidism, caudal duplication anomalies, breast cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), colorectal cancer, and gastrointestinal cancer [1422].

AXIN1, the gene encoding AXIN1, is located within a 65 kb region on chromosome 16p. AXIN1 acts as a tumor suppressor, and mutations in this protein have been shown to play a significant role in carcinogenesis [23]. However, no link has been established so far between AXIN1 and BC. The aim of our study was to determine whether the polymorphic variants of AXIN1 contribute to BC susceptibility. We selected three tag single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)—rs12921862, rs1805105, and rs370681—and determined their prevalence in 316 unrelated BC patients and 419 healthy controls in a Chinese Han population.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Participants’ Clinical Characteristics and Follow-Up

We enrolled 316 patients with bladder cancer (mean : ) and 419 healthy controls (mean : ) from the West China Hospital of Sichuan University from 2007 to 2012. A case control study based on the hospital was approved by the hospital ethics committee, and informed consents were provided by all the participants. Follow-up data of participants were abstracted by telephone calls every 6 months for 5 years. Histopathological analysis was used to confirm the tumor tissues from resected specimens of patients, and the clinical characteristics are summarized in Table 1. This study excluded the control participants who had a personal or family history of BC or other severe diseases and the patients who had previous cancer or metastasized cancer from other origins as well as underwent radiotherapy or chemotherapy. All participants were genetically unrelated individuals of the Han population living in Sichuan province of China.


Age at first diagnosis ()
 Male250 (79.1%)225 (53.7%)
 Female66 (20.9)194 (46.3%)
Smoking status
 Smoker163 (51.6%)184 (43.9%)
 Nonsmoker153 (48.4%)235 (56.1%)
Tumor stage
 MIBC149 (47.2%)
 NMIBC167 (52.8%)
Tumor grade
 High grade182 (57.6%)
 Low grade134 (42.4%)
Clinical stage
 I (Ta ~ T1N0M0)156 (53.1%)
 II (T2N0M0)84 (28.6%)
 III (T3N0M0, T4aN0M0)34 (11.6%)
 IV (T4bN0M0, TnNnM0, TnNnMn, )20 (6.7%)

2.2. AXIN1 Genotyping

The three tag SNPs were picked out according to data in the CHB population sample of the HapMap Project (Data Release 24/Phase II, NCBI build 36 assembly, dpSNPb126) using the algorithm-Tagger-pairwise Tagging from the international HapMap Project [24]. And the PCR primers were designed with software Primer 3 web version 4.1.0. (http://primer3.ut.ee/) [25] as shown in Table 2 (in this part, we followed the methods of Li et al. [26]).

SNPsPrimer sequenceMajor/minor geneAnnealing temperature (°C)Restriction enzymeProduct size (bp)

rs12921862F: 5-CTCACGCCAGTGCCTCTACT-3C/A62ScrF IA: 216

rs1805105F: 5-CTGGATACCTGCCGACCTTA-3T/C65Fok IC: 245


DNA isolation kit from BioTeke (Peking, China) was used to extract each individual’s genomic DNA from a 200 μL EDTA-anticoagulated peripheral blood sample. Genotyping was performed using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP). The DNA fragments containing the polymorphisms were amplified in a total volume of 10 μL, including 5 μL of 2x power Taq PCR Master Mix (BioTeke, Peking, China), 2.7 pico mole of each primer, and 100 ng genomic DNA for rs12921862 and rs1805105, and a total volume of 25 μL, including 2.5 μL of Taq Buffer, 0.3 μL Taq enzyme (BioTeke, Peking, China), 3 μL DNTP, 2.7 pico mole of each primer, and 100 ng genomic DNA for rs370681. The PCR conditions were 94°C for 4 min, followed by 34 cycles of 30 s at 94°C, 30 s at 62°C, 65°C, or 66°C, respectively, and 30 s at 72°C, with a final elongation at 72°C for 10 min for three tag SNPs. Following the termination of PCR, the PCR products were digested by restriction enzyme (presented in Table 2). Finally, the digested fragments were separated by a 6% polyacrylamide gel and stained with 1.5 g/L argent nitrate. Furthermore, the genotypes were confirmed by DNA sequencing analysis. About 10% of the samples were randomly selected to perform the repeated assays, and the results were 100% in agreement.

2.3. Statistical Analyses

SPSS for Windows software package version 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analysis the data. Genotypic association were provided by the SNPstats online analysis software including the codominant, dominant, recessive, and overdominant genetic models [27], and the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was evaluated by chi-squared test. The level of significance was set at . The effects of different genotypes and alleles were evaluated by odds ratio (OR) and respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Kaplan-Meier plots and the log-rank test were used to estimate the relationships of AXIN1 genotypes with patients’ outcomes (recurrence and death). Considering age at first diagnosis, sex, smoking status, tumor grade, and clinical stage, Cox regression analysis model was used for multivariate survival analysis.

3. Results

3.1. AXIN1 SNP Frequencies and BC Susceptibility

The distributions of the three tag SNPs’ genotypes and alleles in both case and control groups were in agreement with the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (). The differences in the genotypes and allele frequencies of AXIN1 SNPs between patients and controls are shown in Table 3. The frequency of the heterozygous genotype (CA) of rs12921862 was significantly higher among the patients compared to controls in the overdominant model (33.5% vs. 8.8%, , , 95% ). In the dominant model, a significantly increased BC risk was related to the CA/AA genotypes (35.1% vs. 10.5%, , , 95% ). Compared to the CC/AA genotypes, the CA genotype was associated with a higher risk of BC in the codominant model (, , 95% ). Similarly, a significant relationship was observed between the A allele-carrying patients and controls (18.4% vs. 6.1%, , , 95% ). For rs1805105, compared with TT carriers, TC/CC carriers were significantly higher in the dominant model (46.5% vs. 39.1%, , , 95% ). In the overdominant model, the TC genotype was significantly associated with increased BC risk compared to the TT/CC genotypes (, , 95% ). For rs370681, significant differences were found in the codominant (CC vs. CT vs. TT, , , 95% , , 95% ), dominant (CC vs. CT/TT, , , 95% ), and recessive models (CC/CT vs. TT, , , 95% ) compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, the frequency of T allele was significantly higher in the BC patients compared to the healthy controls (, , 95% ).

ModelGenotypePatientsControlsLogistic regression
(%) (%)OR (95% CI) value

CodominantCC205 (64.9%)375 (89.5%)1.00
CA106 (33.5%)37 (8.8%)5.24 (3.47-7.91)<0.001
AA5 (1.6%)7 (1.7%)1.31 (0.41-4.17)
DominantCC205 (64.9%)375 (89.5%)1.00
CA/AA111 (35.1%)44 (10.5%)4.61 (3.13-6.81)<0.001
RecessiveCC/CA311 (98.4%)412 (98.3%)1.00
AA5 (1.6%)7 (1.7%)0.95 (0.30-3.01)0.93
OverdominantCC/AA210 (66.5%)382 (91.2%)1.00
CA106 (33.5%)37 (8.8%)5.21 (3.46-7.86)<0.001
AlleleC516 (81.6%)787 (93.9%)1.00
A116 (18.4%)51 (6.1%)3.45 (2.44-5.00)<0.001
CodominantTT168 (53.5%)255 (60.9%)1.00
TC125 (39.8%)136 (32.5%)1.40 (1.02-1.90)0.11
CC21 (6.7%)28 (6.7%)1.14 (0.63-2.07)
DominantTT168 (53.5%)255 (60.9%)1.00
TC/CC146 (46.5%)164 (39.1%)1.35 (1.00-1.82)0.046
RecessiveTT/TC293 (93.3%)391 (93.3%)1.00
CC21 (6.7%)28 (6.7%)1.00 (0.56-1.80)1
OverdominantTT/CC189 (60.2%)283 (67.5%)1.00
TC125 (39.8%)136 (32.5%)1.38 (1.01-1.87)0.04
AlleleT461 (73.4%)646 (77.1%)1.00
C167 (26.6%)192 (22.9%)1.22 (0.96-1.55)0.11
CodominantCC114 (37.9%)204 (48.7%)1.00
CT152 (50.5%)190 (45.4%)1.43 (1.05-1.96)0.002
TT35 (11.6%)25 (6%)2.51 (1.43-4.40)
DominantCC114 (37.9%)204 (48.7%)1.00
CT/TT187 (62.1%)215 (51.3%)1.56 (1.15-2.10)0.004
RecessiveCC/CT266 (88.4%)394 (94%)1.00
TT35 (11.6%)25 (6%)2.07 (1.21-3.55)0.01
OverdominantCC/TT149 (49.5%)229 (54.6%)1.00
CT152 (50.5%)190 (45.4%)1.23 (0.91-1.65)0.17
AlleleC380 (63.1%)598 (71.4%)1.00
T222 (36.9%)240 (28.6%)1.46 (1.16-1.82)0.001

Boldfaced values indicate a significant difference at the 5% level. OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.
3.2. Clinical Characteristics of the SNP Genotypes

To gain further insights into the association between the three tag SNPs and BC, the patients with different SNP genotypes were stratified (Table 4) according to age (≤64 and >64 years old), sex (male and female), smoking status (smoker and nonsmoker), tumor stage (MIBC and NMIBC), tumor grade (high grade and low grade), recurrence status (recurrent and nonrecurrent), and metastasis status (metastatic and nonmetastatic). No significant difference was observed for any subgroups of the three tag SNPs except age and tumor grades. The CA/AA genotypes of rs12921862 had a significantly higher percentage of patients older than 64 years compared with those under 64 years (40.1% vs. 29.2%, , , 95% ), after adjusting for sex, smoking status, tumor stage, tumor grade, recurrence status, and metastasis status. For rs370681, after adjusting for these common risk factors, the T allele-carrying subgroup had a higher frequency of patients with high-grade tumors compared to those with low-grade tumors (68% vs. 54%, , , 95% ). In contrast, no significant relation was seen between the rs1805105 genotypes and the patients’ characteristics after adjusting for common risk factors ().

Genotype valueGenotype valueGenotype value

 ≤64 years old102 (70.8%)42 (29.2%)0.0485 (59%)59 (41%)0.1056 (40.3%)83 (59.7%)0.83
 >64 years old103 (59.9%)69 (40.1%)83 (48.8%)87 (51.2%)58 (35.8%)104 (64.2%)
 Male164 (65.9%)85 (34.1%)0.77128 (51.6%)120 (48.4%)0.4788 (37.5%)147 (62.5%)0.96
 Female41 (61.2%)26 (38.8%)40 (60.6%)26 (39.4%)26 (39.4%)40 (60.6%)
 Smoker111 (68.1%)52 (31.9%)0.480 (49.4%)82 (50.6%)0.2558 (37.7%)96 (62.3%)0.90
 Nonsmoker94 (61.4%)59 (38.6%)88 (57.9%)64 (42.1%)56 (38.1%)91 (61.9%)
Tumor stage
 MIBC98 (65.3%)52 (34.7%)0.9474 (49.7%)75 (50.3%)0.9748 (33.1%)97 (66.9%)0.44
 NMIBC107 (64.5%)59 (35.5%)94 (57%)71 (43%)66 (42.3%)90 (57.7%)
Tumor grade
 High grade120 (65.9%)62 (34.1%)0.4987 (48.3%)93 (51.7%)0.1856 (32%)119 (68%)0.04
 Low grade85 (63.4%)49 (36.6%)81 (60.5%)53 (39.5%)58 (46%)68 (54%)
 Recurrent59 (63.4%)34 (36.6%)0.8450 (53.8%)43 (46.2%)0.9732 (36%)57 (64%)0.40
 Nonrecurrent146 (65.5%)77 (34.5%)118 (53.4%)103 (46.6%)82 (38.7%)130 (61.3%)
 Metastatic31 (62%)19 (38%)0.6824 (49%)25 (51%)0.7019 (40.4%)28 (59.6%)0.07
 Nonmetastatic174 (65.4%)92 (34.6%)144 (54.3%)121 (45.7%)94 (37.1%)159 (62.9%)

Italic values indicate a significant difference at the 5% level. Adjusted by age, sex, smoking status, tumor stage, tumor grade, recurrence status, and metastasis status.
3.3. Prognostic Value of the SNP Genotypes

The statistical association of the SNPs and overall survival of BC patients is summarized in Table 5. At the end of the follow-up in our study, 51 patients (51/316; 16.1%) including 38 MIBC patients and 13 NMIBC patients had died and 93 patients (93/316; 29.4%) including 46 MIBC patients and 47 NMIBC patients had relapsed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated worse prognosis of BC patients with the rs12921862 AA homozygote (log-rank: , Figure 1). However, no significant relationship was observed between the overall survival and the other two SNPs (rs1805105 and rs370681) or between the three SNPs and recurrence-free survival.

Alive/deadHR (95% CI) valueAlive/deadHR (95% CI) value

 Codominant1.41 (0.83-2.42)0.210.10 (0.01-0.84)0.03
 Dominant1.45 (0.74-2.88)0.280.10 (0.01-0.84)0.03
 Recessive1.94 (0.53-6.89)0.32NANA
 Codominant1.40 (0.71-2.76)0.340.97 (0.34-2.72)0.95
 Dominant1.21 (0.58-2.54)0.621.12 (0.35-3.62)0.85
 Recessive4.28 (0.88-20.88)0.070.00 (0.00-NA)0.99
 Codominant1.30 (0.72-2.34)0.380.54 (0.19-1.54)0.25
 Dominant1.76 (0.76-4.06)0.180.60 (0.18-1.97)0.40
 Recessive0.82 (0.21-3.17)0.770.00 (0.00-NA)0.99

Italic values indicate a significant difference at the 5% level. Adjusted by age, sex, smoking status, tumor stage, tumor grade, recurrence status, and metastasis status. HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.

Following the stratification of patients by tumor stage (MIBC and NMIBC), we conducted Cox univariate and multivariate analyses to determine the predictors of prognosis and survival in the different SNP genotypes (Table 5). Univariate analysis showed no significant association between tumor stage and overall survival in any genotype of the three SNPs in BC patients. However, the multivariate analysis showed a correlation between the CA/AA genotypes of AXIN1 rs12921862 and significantly higher overall survival rate (, , 95% ), compared to the CC genotype in NMIBC patients. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis reiterated that the CA/AA genotypes were associated with a better prognosis of NMIBC patients (log-rank: , Figure 2) compared to the CC genotype.

4. Discussion

The Wnt signaling pathway plays a key role during embryonic development and tissue homeostasis, and its dysregulation is associated with various diseases including cancers [7, 8]. The tumor suppressor function of AXIN1 and AXIN2 proteins in the Wnt signaling pathway has long been hypothesized, based largely on their roles in the β-catenin destruction complex. However, no study had directly linked AXIN1 with BC progression or the proliferation of BC cells. In the present study, we analyzed the potential relationship between different AXIN1 gene SNPs and BC risk in a Chinese Han population. Despite extensive linkage disequilibrium in the human genome, a tag SNP could represent most of the haplotypes in a specific region. Our data revealed that the three tag SNPs were associated with an increased risk of BC, which corresponded to the previous observations that activating or inhibiting Wnt signaling accelerates or suppresses, respectively, the invasion and migration of BC cells as well as the carcinogenesis of BC tumor [12, 13]. We calculated the statistical power using Power and Sample Size Calculations for Windows software package version 3.0 [28], and it showed that our data had more than 80% power to detect the relationship between AXIN1 SNPs and BC risk.

Tumor suppressor protein AXIN1 deregulates β-catenin and mitosis to weaken the ER+ and ER- breast cancer [14, 19]. It interacts with β-catenin and regulates its localization, along with that of Wnt-dependent downstream targets like cyclin D1, fra-1, c-myc, and c-jun [18, 29]. One previous study showed that poorly differentiated NSCLC had low levels of AXIN1 relating a high expression of nuclear β-catenin, which was reversed in the well- or moderately differentiated tumors [30]. The oncogenic effects of AXIN monoallele mutations that lead to β-catenin stabilization result from the dominant negative activity [31]. Compared to the CC homozygote of the rs12921862 SNP, the CA/AA genotypes were associated with a significantly higher overall survival rate and implicated in a better prognosis of the BC patients, which might indicate a potential dominant negative protective effect of the latter in NMIBC patients. Furthermore, these results are consistent with the better prognosis of NMIBC patients compared to the MIBC.

Tumor stratification is used to grade cancers according to their malignancy: high-grade tumor classification normally represents a worse prognosis compared to that of the low grade. Studies have shown that the AXIN1 rs1805105 polymorphism is correlated with the early tumor stages (I and II, modified by the Union for International Cancer Control) and the small tumor size (under 5 cm) of HCC [32] but increases the risk of developing advance-stage renal carcinogenesis (RCC III and IV) [33]. However, we found no significant association between the rs1805105 genotypes and tumor grade in our study, although the C allele carriers had a higher (albeit nonsignificant: 51.7% vs. 39.5%) frequency of patients with high-grade tumor compared to those with low-grade tumors. This indicated a nonsignificant tendency that the C allele may be correlated with the potential risk of developing higher-grade tumors among BC patients. Interestingly, the frequency of T allele carriers of the rs370681 SNP with high-grade tumors was significantly elevated than that with low-grade tumors, which indicated an association of this SNP with severe BC. These results are consistent with previous studies on HCC and RCC.

Bladder cancer is an older-susceptible cancer although the average age of the afflicted has decreased over these years. In this study also, we found that the CA/AA carriers of rs12921862 SNP had significantly higher frequencies of patients older than 64 years compared to those under 64 years, indicating that the A allele could be one of the risk factors of increased BC susceptibility in the older population.

A correlation between reduced AXIN1 expression and tumor progression has been reported in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, and several mutations and polymorphisms of AXIN1 have been found in squamous cell tumors and cell lines [23, 34, 35]. Several recent studies have detected AXIN1 gene sequence variations in subsets of ovarian endometrial adenocarcinomas and advanced prostate cancer, indicating new potentially relevant AXIN1 mutations [23, 36]. Furthermore, Chimge et al. found that AXIN1 could be a potential target for the management of ER+ breast cancer [14]. Our study demonstrated the association of certain AXIN1 gene polymorphisms with higher BC susceptibility and higher overall survival rate of NMIBC patients. Our results provide a new insight into potential predictive factors of BC progression and prognosis.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, AXIN1 SNPs are potential risk factors of BC susceptibility, rs370681 is associated with a severe form of BC, and rs12921862 is a significant forecast factor to BC prognosis. However, our study has several limitations. We did not analyze the expression levels of AXIN1 in the patients’ sera and tumor tissues. Also, we only studied a cohort of southwest China, whereas different ethnic populations differ in the types and frequencies of genetic polymorphisms. Therefore, further studies on larger and more diverse cohorts are needed to validate AXIN1 SNPs as reliable markers to predict the progression and prognosis of bladder cancer.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are currently under embargo while the research findings are commercialized. Requests for data, 6 months after publication of this article, will be considered by the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Qin Li and Peng Zhang contributed equally to this work.


This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 81670346 and no. 81172440), the Applied Basic Research Programs of Science and Technology Commission Foundation of Sichuan Province (no. 2016SZ0013), the International Cooperation Project of the Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province (no. 2018HH0014), and Science and Technology Major Project of Sichuan Province (no. 2017SZDZX0013). In addition, we especially wish to thank Yan Pu, who provided part of the important data of participants.


  1. J. Ferlay, I. SoerjomataramI, M. Ervik et al., Globocan 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: Iarc CancerBase no. 11, International agency for research on cancer, http://globocan.Iarc.Fr.
  2. R. L. Siegel, K. D. Miller, and A. Jemal, “Cancer statistics, 2015,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 5–29, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. M. Babjuk, A. Böhle, M. Burger et al., “Eau guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016,” European Urology, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 447–461, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. M. Burger, J. W. F. Catto, G. Dalbagni et al., “Epidemiology and risk factors of urothelial bladder cancer,” European Urology, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 234–241, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. N. D. Freedman, D. T. Silverman, A. R. Hollenbeck, A. Schatzkin, and C. C. Abnet, “Association between smoking and risk of bladder cancer among men and women,” JAMA, vol. 306, no. 7, pp. 737–745, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. J. Gu, D. Liang, Y. Wang, C. Lu, and X. Wu, “Effects of n-acetyl transferase 1 and 2 polymorphisms on bladder cancer risk in caucasians,” Mutation Research, vol. 581, no. 1-2, pp. 97–104, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. R. Nusse and H. Clevers, “Wnt/β-catenin signaling, disease, and emerging therapeutic modalities,” Cell, vol. 169, no. 6, pp. 985–999, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. C. Y. Logan and R. Nusse, “The wnt signaling pathway in development and disease,” Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 781–810, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. S. Urakami, H. Shiina, H. Enokida et al., “Combination analysis of hypermethylated wnt-antagonist family genes as a novel epigenetic biomarker panel for bladder cancer detection,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 2109–2116, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. K. Shin, J. Lee, N. Guo et al., “Hedgehog/wnt feedback supports regenerative proliferation of epithelial stem cells in bladder,” Nature, vol. 472, no. 7341, pp. 110–114, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. S. Urakami, H. Shiina, H. Enokida et al., “Epigenetic inactivation of wnt inhibitory factor-1 plays an important role in bladder cancer through aberrant canonical wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 383–391, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. X. W. Mao, J. Q. Xiao, Z. Y. Li, Y. C. Zheng, and N. Zhang, “Effects of microrna-135a on the epithelial-mesenchymal transition, migration and invasion of bladder cancer cells by targeting gsk3β through the wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,” Experimental and Molecular Medicine, vol. 50, no. 1, article e429, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. Y. Tang, A. R. Simoneau, W. X. Liao et al., “Wif1, a wnt pathway inhibitor, regulates skp2 and c-myc expression leading to g1 arrest and growth inhibition of human invasive urinary bladder cancer cells,” Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 458–468, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. N. O. Chimge, G. H. Little, S. K. Baniwal et al., “Runx1 prevents oestrogen-mediated axin1 suppression and β-catenin activation in er-positive breast cancer,” Nature Communications, vol. 7, no. 1, article 10751, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. L. Fang, J. Cai, B. Chen et al., “Aberrantly expressed mir-582-3p maintains lung cancer stem cell-like traits by activating wnt/β-catenin signalling,” Nature Communications, vol. 6, no. 1, article 8640, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. S. Abitbol, R. Dahmani, C. Coulouarn et al., “Axin deficiency in human and mouse hepatocytes induces hepatocellular carcinoma in the absence of β-catenin activation,” Journal of Hepatology, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 1203–1213, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. Y. Lu, S. Xie, W. Zhang et al., “Twa1/gid8 is a β-catenin nuclear retention factor in wnt signaling and colorectal tumorigenesis,” Cell Research, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 1422–1440, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. S. M. Mazzoni and E. R. Fearon, “Axin1 and axin2 variants in gastrointestinal cancers,” Cancer Letters, vol. 355, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. N. O. Chimge, S. Ahmed-Alnassar, and B. Frenkel, “Relationship between runx1 and axin1 in er-negative versus er-positive breast cancer,” Cell Cycle, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 312–318, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. N. A. Oates, J. van Vliet, D. L. Duffy et al., “Increased DNA methylation at the axin1 gene in a monozygotic twin from a pair discordant for a caudal duplication anomaly,” American Journal of Human Genetics, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 155–162, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. Y. Pu, P. Chen, B. Zhou et al., “Association between polymorphisms in AXIN1 gene and atrial septal defect,” Biomarkers, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 674–678, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. B. Zhou, T. Tang, P. Chen et al., “The variations in the axin1 gene and susceptibility to cryptorchidism,” Journal of Pediatric Urology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 132.e1–132.e5, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. S. Salahshor and J. R. Woodgett, “The links between axin and carcinogenesis,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 225–236, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. “Ncbi retiring hapmap resource,” http://www.Hapmap.Org/index.Html.Zh. View at: Google Scholar
  25. A. Untergasser, I. Cutcutache, T. Koressaar et al., “Primer3—new capabilities and interfaces,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 40, no. 15, article E115, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. Q. Li, T. Tang, P. Zhang et al., “Correlation of il-31 gene polymorphisms with susceptibility and clinical recurrence of bladder cancer,” Familial Cancer, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 577–585, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. X. Sole, E. Guino, J. Valls, R. Iniesta, and V. Moreno, “Snpstats: a web tool for the analysis of association studies,” Bioinformatics, vol. 22, no. 15, pp. 1928-1929, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. W. D. Dupont and W. D. Plummer Jr., “Power and sample size calculations. A review and computer program,” Controlled Clinical Trials, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 116–128, 1990. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. A. Kikuchi, “Modulation of wnt signaling by axin and axil,” Cytokine and Growth Factor Reviews, vol. 10, no. 3-4, pp. 255–265, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. H. T. Xu, L. Wang, D. Lin et al., “Abnormal β-catenin and reduced axin expression are associated with poor differentiation and progression in non-small cell lung cancer,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 125, no. 4, pp. 534–541, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. J. Behrens, B. A. Jerchow, M. Würtele et al., “Functional interaction of an axin homolog, conductin, with β-catenin, apc, and gsk3β,” Science, vol. 280, no. 5363, pp. 596–599, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. S. S. Kim, H. J. Cho, H. Y. Lee et al., “Genetic polymorphisms in the wnt/β-catenin pathway genes as predictors of tumor development and survival in patients with hepatitis B virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma,” Clinical Biochemistry, vol. 49, no. 10-11, pp. 792–801, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. Y. Pu, X. Mi, P. Chen et al., “Genetic association of polymorphisms in AXIN1 gene with clear cell renal cell carcinoma in a chinese population,” Biomarkers in Medicine, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 947–955, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. M. Nakajima, M. Fukuchi, T. Miyazaki, N. Masuda, H. Kato, and H. Kuwano, “Reduced expression of axin correlates with tumour progression of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 88, no. 11, pp. 1734–1739, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. J. de Castro, C. Gamallo, J. Palacios et al., “β-catenin expression pattern in primary oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Relationship with clinicopathologic features and clinical outcome,” Virchows Archiv, vol. 437, no. 6, pp. 599–604, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. G. W. Yardy, D. C. Bicknell, J. L. Wilding et al., “Mutations in the axin1 gene in advanced prostate cancer,” European Urology, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 486–494, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 Qin Li et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.