Gastroenterology Research and Practice

Gastroenterology Research and Practice / 2015 / Article
Special Issue

Novel Molecular Targets in Malignant Diseases of Digestive System 2014

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2015 |Article ID 764163 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/764163

Qing Ni, Anlai Ji, Junfeng Yin, Xiangjun Wang, Xinnong Liu, "Effects of Two Common Polymorphisms rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 on Gastric Cancer Susceptibility", Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2015, Article ID 764163, 10 pages, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/764163

Effects of Two Common Polymorphisms rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 on Gastric Cancer Susceptibility

Academic Editor: Zhongxia Wang
Received30 Aug 2014
Accepted25 Oct 2014
Published23 Apr 2015

Abstract

Background. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding microRNAs may play important role in the development of gastric cancer. It has been reported that common SNPs rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 are associated with susceptibility to gastric cancer. The published results remain inconclusive or even controversial. A meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively assess potential association between the two common SNPs and gastric cancer risk. Methods. A comprehensive literature search was performed in multiple internet-based electronic databases. Data from 12 eligible studies were extracted to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results. C allele of rs2910164 is associated with reduced gastric cancer risk in heterozygote model and dominant model whereas rs11614913 indicates no significant association. Subgroup analysis demonstrates that C allele of rs2910164 and rs11614913 may decrease susceptibility to diffuse type gastric cancer in dominant model and recessive model, respectively, while rs11614913 increased intestinal type gastric cancer in dominant model. Conclusion. SNPs rs2910164 and rs11614913 might have effect on gastric cancer risk in certain genetic models and specific types of cancer. Further well-designed studies should be considered to validate the potential effect.

1. Introduction

Gastric cancer is among the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. It is estimated that 989,600 new gastric cancer cases were diagnosed in 2008 and caused 738,000 deaths in a single year. Gastric cancer accounts for 8% of total cancer cases and 10% cancer-related death [1]. Despite decreasing incidence of gastric cancer in developed countries, gastric cancer remains a major health problem globally, especially in Eastern Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America, which may be attributed to particular dietary pattern, high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection, and limited availability to proper food storage [24]. The mechanism of gastric carcinogenesis remains elusive. Epidemiological studies have shed light on risk factors of gastric cancer including lifestyle factors, environmental carcinogens, and, importantly, Helicobacter pylori infection [5, 6]. However, these risk factors cannot fully explain the development of gastric cancer since only a minority of exposed population finally developed gastric cancer, indicating possible interplay between risk factors and personal background including genetic susceptibility [7].

In recent years, potential association between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and risk of gastric cancer were reported [8]. Among the reported SNPs, correlation between SNPs located in genes encoding microRNAs (miRNAs) or their binding sites is of great interest [9, 10]. miRNAs are small noncoding, single-stranded RNA molecules composed of around 22 nucleotides. miRNAs bind to complementary sequences in 3′-untranslated regions of messenger RNAs and negatively regulate their stability or translational efficiency, therefore regulating posttranscriptional activity of genes [1113]. Aberrant function or expression of miRNAs was reported to play important roles in gastric cancer. Since a single miRNA may have numerous targets, even a slight variation of a miRNA may lead to aberrance of a wide spectrum of gene expression, including many oncogenes and tumor-suppressor genes [7, 14]. SNPs in miRNA may also be involved in gastric cancer susceptibility through altering the expression or function of miRNAs, subsequently leading to aberrant expression of a set of genes [7, 15].

SNPs rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 have been reported as biomarkers of gastric cancer risk [1627]. However, the results of these studies are controversial and inconclusive. Since the effects of SNPs in miRNAs on gastric cancer susceptibility may be slight, sample size of individual association study could be insufficient to detect minor modifications of gastric cancer risk. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to systematically estimate the potential association between rs2910164/rs11614913 and susceptibility to gastric cancer with all available evidence.

2. Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

A systematic literature search was carried out using the combination of the following terms: “miR-146a,” “miR-196a2,” “miR-196a-2,” “rs2910164,” “rs11614913,” “gastric cancer,” “gastric carcinoma,” “gastric adenocarcinoma,” “stomach cancer,” “stomach carcinoma,” and “stomach adenocarcinoma” in multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Springer Link, Wiley Online Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and VIP Info database. Two investigators (Qing Ni and Anlai Ji) independently performed the database search. Publication language, date, and publication form (full-length article or abstract/correspondence) were not restricted. All of the search results were imported into Endnote X6 reference managing software and duplicate records were removed. The reference lists of potentially eligible studies were searched manually. The two investigators crosschecked the search results and reached consensus.

2.2. Literature Selection

We selected eligible studies based on the following criteria: (1) case-control study; (2) investigated associations between rs2910164 and/or rs11614913 and gastric cancer susceptibility; (3) provided sufficient data of allele and genotype frequencies of SNPs or required information could be calculated; (4) if serial studies on the same population were published, only the most recent study was included; (5) proper methodology design. Quality of methodology was evaluated by (1) comparable demographic characteristics between patients and control population; (2) proper diagnosis of gastric cancer; (3) appropriate methods and quality control for genotype determination; (4) Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium that was reached in control group; (5) proper statistical methods that were used. Two independent investigators (Qing Ni and Anlai Ji) performed study selection and reached final consensus. The details of literature search and selection were shown in Figure 1 in standard PRISMA flow diagram style.

2.3. Data Extraction

Data for meta-analysis were extracted from eligible studies by two independent investigators (Qing Ni and Anlai Ji). Authors of study, publish year, origin country, ethnicity of studied population, study design (hospital based, HB, or population based, PB), genotyping method, and allele/genotype frequencies were collected. Two investigators crosschecked the results of data abstraction and discussed them to reach mutual agreement by discussion.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Quantitative data synthesis was performed by Review Manager 5.2.11 (Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration). Statistical heterogeneity among studies was estimated by -based test. A value less than 0.1 for test indicated the existence of significant statistical heterogeneity [28]. If no significant heterogeneity was detected, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were estimated by the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model [29]. Otherwise, the DerSimonian-Liard random-effects model was used to calculate pooled ORs [30, 31]. The amount of heterogeneity was measured by the statistic [32]. value less than 25%, between 25% and 50%, greater than 50% indicated low, moderate, and high heterogeneity, respectively. The statistical significance of pooled ORs was determined by test. A value for test less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Forest plots were provided generated to summarize the results of meta-analysis. The strength of associations between SNPs and the risk of gastric cancer were determined under the following genetic models: (1) allele frequency (C versus G for rs2910164 and C versus T for rs11614913); (2) heterozygous model (GC versus GG for rs2910164 and TC versus TT for rs11614913); (3) homozygous model (CC versus GG for rs2910164 and CC versus TT for rs11614913); (4) dominant model (GC + CC versus GG for rs2910164 and TC + CC versus TT for rs11614913); (5) recessive model (CC versus GG + GC for rs2910164 and CC versus TT + TC for rs11614913).

Sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding one individual study in turn to observe whether the significance of heterogeneity test and pooled ORs changed. Subgroup analyses were performed by stratified analysis according to Lauren’s histology classification of gastric cancer (intestinal or diffuse), cardiac or noncardiac gastric cancer, and lymph node status (N0 or N1) when sufficient data were available.

2.5. Publication Bias

Publication bias of the included studies was assessed by funnel plots generated by Review Manager. Begg’s test and Egger’s test were performed using STATA 11 software. A symmetrical plot suggested no obvious publication bias.

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Included Studies

A total of 582 papers were retrieved after electronic search and duplicate removal. As shown in Figure 1, after initial screening and review of full-text, 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis [1627]. Characteristics of included studies were presented in Tables 1 and 2. For rs2910164 in miR-146a, 9 studies consisting of 4468 cases and 6844 controls were analyzed [16, 17, 1922, 24, 25, 27]. For rs11614913, 9 studies involving 3992 cases and 5418 controls were included [1620, 23, 2527]. The genotyping methods in these studies include polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP), polymerase chain reaction with confronting two-pair primers (PCR-CTPP), and TaqMan probe-based genotyping.


AuthorYear CountryEthnicityStudy designSNPGenotyping methodsHWECase genotypeControl genotype
GGGCCCGGGCCC

Ahn et al. [20]2013South KoreaAsianHBrs2910164PCR-RFLP0.3627123115962221164
Dikeakos et al. [19]2014GreeceCaucasianHBrs2910164PCR-RFLP0.289134510524149307
Hishida et al. [21]2011JapanAsianHBrs2910164PCR-CTPP0.73882271230229775633
Kupcinskas et al. [25]2014Germany/
Lithuania/
Latvia
CaucasianHBrs2910164TaqMan0.531252941622310816
Okubo et al. [17]2010JapanAsianHBrs2910164PCR-RFLP0.27873243236121322254
Parlayan et al. [16]2014JapanAsianHBrs2910164TaqMan0.64020796171237216
Pu et al. [27]2014ChinaAsianHBrs2910164PCR-RFLP0.08036966596274143
Zeng et al. [22]2010ChinaAsianHBrs2910164PCR-RFLP0.122621538953132119
Zhou et al. [24]2012 ChinaAsianHBrs2910164 TaqMan0.544248380122236424175
0.929330442164315527218

SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; HB, hospital based; PCR-RFLP, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism; PCR-CTPP, polymerase chain reaction with confronting two-pair primers; HWE, value for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium test.

AuthorYearCountryEthnicityStudy designSNPGenotyping methodsHWECase genotypeControl genotype
TTTCCCTTTCCC

Ahn et al. [20]2013South KoreaAsianHBrs11614913PCR-RFLP0.32211924210012823287
Dikeakos et al. [19]2014GreeceCaucasianHBrs11614913PCR-RFLP0.850154610217222979
Kupcinskas et al. [25]2014Germany/
Lithuania/
Latvia
CaucasianHBrs11614913TaqMan0.1613518414446145159
Okubo et al. [17]2010JapanAsianHBrs11614913PCR-RFLP0.510166281105223350124
Parlayan et al. [16]2014JapanAsianHBrs11614913TaqMan0.410447244146270108
Peng et al. [18]2010ChinaAsianHBrs11614913PCR-RFLP0.9364394765010756
Pu et al. [27]2014ChinaAsianHBrs11614913PCR-RFLP<0.0125953986324101
Wang et al. [66]2013   ChinaAsianHBrs11614913 TaqMan0.898226371152232448220
0.058293480167292492262
Yang et al. [26]2013ChinaAsianPBrs11614913TaqMan0.100211091024213672

SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; HB, hospital based; PB, population based; PCR-RFLP, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism; HWE, value for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium test.
3.2. Association between rs2910164 in miR-146a and Gastric Cancer Susceptibility

The association between rs2910164 and the risk of gastric cancer were analyzed based on data from 9 studies [16, 17, 1922, 24, 25, 27]. The report from Zhou et al. [24] is comprised of two independent populations. In this meta-analysis, the two population groups were included separately. Significant heterogeneity was detected in allele frequency model, homozygote model, and recessive model and random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled ORs and 95% CIs in these comparisons. The results of the meta-analyses on rs2910164 were summarized in Table 3. Heterozygous C allele carrier showed decreased risk of gastric cancer compared with GG genotype (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.81–0.99, , Figure 2(a)). Similarly, in dominant model, GC and CC genotypes were associated with less susceptibility to gastric cancer compared with GG carriers (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.97, , Figure 2(b)). No significant association was demonstrated in allele frequency model, homozygote model, and recessive model. Interestingly, in sensitivity analysis, after removal of Okubo et al.’s study, statistical heterogeneity in allele frequency model, homozygote model, and recessive model all became nonsignificant and the pooled ORs showed reduced risk of gastric cancer with statistical significance. Therefore, the study from Okubo et al. may represent an outlier among the included studies. We next performed subgroup analyses stratified by Lauren’s histology classification in dominant model and recessive model (Table 5). The results indicated that, in dominant model, GC and CC carriers had reduced risk of diffuse type gastric cancer (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.74–0.99, , Figure 2(c)). No significant association was suggested in other models and intestinal type gastric cancer.


Genetic modelPooled OR [95% CI]

C versus G0.94 [0.85–1.04]0.210.003
GC versus GG0.89 [0.81–0.99]0.030.43
CC versus GG0.89 [0.72–1.08]0.230.009
GC + CC versus GG0.88 [0.80–0.97]0.0090.12
CC versus GC + GG0.94 [0.81–1.08]0.380.008

OR, odds ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; , value for heterogeneity test.

3.3. Association between rs11614913 in miR-196a2 and Gastric Cancer Susceptibility

Potential association between rs11614913 and susceptibility to gastric cancer was evaluated using the data reported in 9 studies [1620, 23, 2527]. Wang et al.’s study [23] included two sets of independent cases and controls which were analyzed as separate populations in this meta-analysis. Heterogeneity test in all of the genetic models showed statistical significance and random-effects model was used. The results of the comparisons were listed in Table 4. To our surprise, rs11614913 in miR-196a2 demonstrated no significant association with gastric cancer risk in any genetic model tested. Although exclusion of the studies from Dikeakos et al., Kupcinskas et al., and Wang et al., respectively, diminished statistical heterogeneity in heterozygote model (TC versus CC), pooled ORs remained nonsignificant. In subgroup analyses (Table 5), rs11614913 was not associated with either cardiac or noncardiac lesions. In recessive model, this SNP also presented no association with lymph node metastasis. Interestingly, CC genotype may correlate with a decreased risk of diffuse gastric cancer in recessive model, as suggested by a pooled OR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.71–0.97, , Figure 3(a)). TC and CC genotypes may predispose carrier to intestinal type cancer in dominant model (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.03–1.55, , Figure 3(b)).


Genetic modelPooled OR [95% CI]

C versus T1.25 [0.97–1.60]0.09<0.00001
TC versus TT1.09 [0.94–1.28]0.250.06
CC versus TT1.52 [0.96–2.39]0.07<0.00001
TC + CC versus TT1.26 [0.98–1.63]0.07<0.00001
CC versus TC + TT1.36 [0.90–2.05]0.14<0.00001

OR, odds ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; , value for heterogeneity test.

SNPNumber of studiesSubgroupGenetic modelPooled OR [95% CI]

rs29101644Intestinal typeGC + CC versus GG0.95 [0.72–1.25]0.70.04
rs29101654Diffuse typeGC + CC versus GG0.86 [0.74–0.99]0.040.11
rs29101643Intestinal typeCC versus GG + GC0.91 [0.76–1.11]0.360.33
rs29101653Diffuse typeCC versus GG + GC0.88 [0.68–1.14]0.330.26
rs116149133Cardiac lesionCC versus TT + TC0.91 [0.51–1.64]0.760.04
rs116149133Noncardiac lesionCC versus TT + TC1.10 [0.63–1.89]0.740.0002
rs116149133Lymph node negativeCC versus TT + TC0.89 [0.74–1.07]0.220.15
rs116149133Lymph node positiveCC versus TT + TC1.54 [0.54–4.35]0.42<0.00001
rs116149133Intestinal typeTC + CC versus TT1.27 [1.03–1.55]0.020.23
rs116149133Diffuse typeTC + CC versus TT1.01 [0.78–1.32]0.920.55
rs116149134Intestinal typeCC versus TT + TC0.91 [0.64–1.28]0.580.003
rs116149134Diffuse typeCC versus TT + TC0.83 [0.71–0.97]0.020.4

OR, odds ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; , value for heterogeneity test.

3.4. Publication Bias

The distribution of studies in funnel plots for analyses of rs2910164 was symmetrical, indicating no evidence for significant publication bias. Begg’s test and Egger’s test in meta-analyses demonstrating significant outcome also suggested no statistically significant publication bias in these comparisons (GC versus GG: Begg’s test and Egger’s test ; GC + CC versus GG: Begg’s test and Egger’s test ). However, the funnel plots for rs11614913 showed asymmetrical distribution. Publication bias may exist in studies on potential association between rs11614913 and gastric cancer susceptibility.

4. Discussion

Recent research on miRNAs has led to new insight into molecular mechanisms of gastric cancer development [10, 33, 34]. Variations in miRNAs may have profound impact on individual’s susceptibility to gastric cancer through regulating a wide spectrum of oncogenes and tumor-suppressor genes. SNPs in miRNA-coding genes and their influence on gastric cancer risk have drawn much attention and related results may help broaden our horizon of gastric cancer. Better understanding of SNPs in miRNAs could improve current management of this detrimental disease by early detection of gastric cancer in high risk populations [35]. Functional SNPs rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 are reported to have association with gastric cancer susceptibility though the results are inconclusive or even controversial [1627]. In this present study, we conducted a meta-analysis by quantitatively synthesizing available data from 12 published papers to demonstrate potential effects of these two common SNPs on gastric cancer susceptibility.

Located in the stem region opposite to mature miR-146a sequence, rs2910164 G > C polymorphism changed G : U pair to C : U mispair in the stem region of the precursor of miR-146a. C allele of rs2910164 resulted in decreased production of mature miR-146a and subsequently reduced the inhibition of multiple target genes in thyroid cells and hepatocellular carcinoma [36, 37]. In contrast, another two studies reported that C allele of rs2910164 elevated the expression level of miR-146a in breast cancer cells and cervical cancer tissues [38, 39]. The different regulation of this SNP on mature mir-146a may reflect complex gene background between different tissues. The influenced genes by miR-146a include IL-1 receptor-associated kinase 1 (IRAK1), TNF receptor-associated factor 6 (TRAF6), and papillary thyroid carcinoma 1 (PTC1) [36]. Interestingly, IRAK1 and TRAF6 are involved in the regulation of Toll-like receptor (TLR-4) pathway, which has important role in innate immunity against Helicobacter pylori [40, 41]. Hishida et al.’s indeed elucidated interaction between miR-146a rs2910164 and TLR4 + 3725 polymorphisms. Their study found that GG genotype of rs2910164 and TLR4 + 3725 C allele increased the risk of severe gastric atrophy in Helicobacter pylori-infected Japanese population [21]. miR-146a itself also has important role in cancer cell proliferation [37]. Association between rs2910164 and gastric cancer susceptibility has been reported [17, 20, 22, 24]; however other studies demonstrated no correlation of this SNP with gastric cancer risk [16, 19, 21, 25, 27].

In this meta-analysis, a total of 9 case-control studies were systematically summarized to generate a comprehensive evaluation of the association between rs2910164 in miR-146a and gastric cancer susceptibility. Our result indicated that rs2910164 GC genotype displayed reduced risk of gastric cancer compared with GG carriers. In dominant model, GC and CC genotype also showed decreased susceptibility to gastric cancer with statistical significance. This association was not found in other genetic models. However, the study from Okubo et al. [17] had a significant influence on pooled ORs. In sensitivity analyses, removal of this study not only diminished statistical heterogeneity among included studies but also changed pooled ORs towards significant reduced risk of gastric cancer in allele frequency model (C versus G), homozygote model (CC versus GG), and recessive model (CC versus GC + GG). This study may be the source of heterogeneity with potential bias and could cause a major distortion on the analysis of association between rs2910164 and gastric cancer risk. The possible effect of rs2910164 on gastric cancer susceptibility in allele frequency, homozygote model, and recessive model should not be ruled out. In subgroup analysis, our results demonstrated a significant reduction of diffuse type cancer in dominant model. This result is of considerable importance since diffused type gastric cancer is correlated with poorer prognosis [42]. C allele of rs2910164 may represent a protective factor against diffused type cancer and could serve as a reference in the screening among high risk population.

The other SNP investigated in this study is rs11614913 in miR-196a2. It was initially reported as a prognostic factor of non-small cell lung cancer [43]. The role of rs11614913 in esophageal cancer [44], hepatocellular carcinoma [45], and head and neck cancer [46] was also demonstrated. C allele of rs11614913 increased the expression of mature miR-196a2 in HCC tissues [47] and may cause aberrant expression of downstream genes, including several carcinogenesis-related genes such as homeobox (HOX) family, annexin A1 (ANXA1), and high mobility group AT-hook1 (HMGA1) [48]. Aberrance in HOX family transcription factors plays a significant role in gastric carcinogenesis and cancer stemness [49]. Acting as a mediator of apoptosis and an inhibitor of proliferation, ANXA1 participates in many pathological processes of human disease [5052]. Deregulation of ANXA1 was found in both precancerous gastric lesions and gastric cancer [53, 54]. Similarly, HMGA1 was also reported to maintain cell proliferation in gastric cancer [55]. Therefore, SNP rs11614913 in miR-196a2 could cause multiple expression change of gastric cancer-related genes and contribute to susceptibility of gastric cancer.

Our meta-analysis systematically summarized data from 9 studies involving 10 study populations and to our surprise, rs11614913 in miR196a2 did not associate with gastric cancer risk in any genetic model tested. Nevertheless, in subgroup analyses, CC genotype of rs11614913 was found to reduce the risk of diffuse type gastric cancer in recessive model compared with TT and TC carriers. Interestingly, TC and CC carriers showed higher risk of intestinal type cancer in dominant model. These findings were not suggested in comparisons in tumor location (cardiac or noncardiac lesion) and lymph node status.

4.1. Comparison with Other Meta-Analyses

Before this meta-analysis, several papers from other authors have been published on the effects of rs2910164 and rs11614913 on cancer risk [5668]. However, most of these studies did not distinguish type of cancers and investigated overall effect of the SNPs on all types of cancer [5659, 62]. Some papers narrowed the aim of study to digestive cancers or gastrointestinal cancers but still included several cancers from different tissues [60, 61, 6466]. A major concern is that different cancers from different tissue origins have distinct mechanism of pathogenesis. The clinical heterogeneity brought by this inherent difference could distort the result of meta-analysis. Only one study from Hua et al. summarized potential effect of these two common SNPs on gastric cancer by meta-analysis [7]. Their study found no association between rs2910164 and rs11614913 and gastric cancer susceptibility. Several additional studies have been reported after they published their paper, which is added to this updated meta-analysis. Therefore, this present study included all available evidence up to date and provided most comprehensive analysis regarding the effect of these two common SNPs on gastric cancer risk. Additionally, we also performed subgroup analyses to explore potential association between SNPs and cancer histological types, tumor locations, and lymph node status. Our results may expand our knowledge on rs2910164 and rs11614913 and their role in altering the risk of gastric cancer.

4.2. Limitations

Of note, this meta-analysis has its limitations and the results should be interpreted with caution. First, although we carried out the comparisons in similar backgrounds, significant heterogeneity still exists, especially in the analyses of rs11614913. Okubo et al.’s study [17] brought statistical heterogeneity with significance in the comparisons of rs2910164. The heterogeneity may distort the results of this meta-analysis and potential association between rs2910164 and susceptibility to gastric cancer should not be ruled out in genetic models that did not derive statistical significance. Second, due to limited number of studies, the subgroup analyses should be interpreted cautiously even if they indicated positive results. The role of these SNPs in different histological types should be further explored. Third, publication bias existed in studies on rs11614913, which implies the true effect of rs11614913 may not be fully discovered or reported.

In summary, despite the limitations, this meta-analysis suggests that rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs11614913 in miR-196a2 might be associated with reduced gastric cancer risk in certain genetic models and cancer histological types. More future studies with good methodology design are warranted.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Authors’ Contribution

Qing Ni and Xinnong Liu conceived this study. Qing Ni, Anlai Ji, Junfeng Yin, and Xiangjun Wang collected data. Anlai Ji, Junfeng Yin, and Xiangjun Wang analyzed data. Qing Ni, Anlai Ji, and Xinnong Liu composed the paper. All of the authors have read the paper and gave final approval for publication. Qing Ni and Anlai Ji contributed equally to this study.

Acknowledgment

This study was supported by Yangzhou Key Discipline/Laboratory of Medicine and Key Provincial Talents Program.

References

  1. A. Jemal, F. Bray, M. M. Center, J. Ferlay, E. Ward, and D. Forman, “Global cancer statistics,” CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 69–90, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. D. M. Parkin, “The global health burden of infection-associated cancers in the year 2002,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 118, no. 12, pp. 3030–3044, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. P. Bertuccio, L. Chatenoud, F. Levi et al., “Recent patterns in gastric cancer: a global overview,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 125, no. 3, pp. 666–673, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. L. Yang, “Incidence and mortality of gastric cancer in China,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 17–20, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
  5. K. D. Crew and A. I. Neugut, “Epidemiology of upper gastrointestinal malignancies,” Seminars in Oncology, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 450–464, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. N. Uemura, S. Okamoto, S. Yamamoto et al., “Helicobacter pylori infection and the development of gastric cancer,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 345, no. 11, pp. 784–789, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. H.-B. Hua, T.-T. Yan, and Q.-M. Sun, “miRNA polymorphisms and risk of gastric cancer in Asian population,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 19, pp. 5700–5707, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. N. Saeki, H. Ono, H. Sakamoto, and T. Yoshida, “Genetic factors related to gastric cancer susceptibility identified using a genome-wide association study,” Cancer Science, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. A. Link, J. Kupcinskas, T. Wex, and P. Malfertheiner, “Macro-role of microRNA in gastric cancer,” Digestive Diseases, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 255–267, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. H.-W. Pan, S.-C. Li, and K.-W. Tsai, “MicroRNA dysregulation in gastric cancer,” Current Pharmaceutical Design, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 1273–1284, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  11. D. P. Bartel, “MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function,” Cell, vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 281–297, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. D. P. Bartel, “MicroRNAs: target recognition and regulatory functions,” Cell, vol. 136, no. 2, pp. 215–233, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. G. C. Shukla, J. Singh, and S. Barik, “MicroRNAs: processing, maturation, target recognition and regulatory functions,” Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 83–92, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. F. Lovat, N. Valeri, and C. M. Croce, “MicroRNAs in the pathogenesis of cancer,” Seminars in Oncology, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 724–733, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. M. A. Saunders, H. Liang, and W.-H. Li, “Human polymorphism at microRNAs and microRNA target sites,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 104, no. 9, pp. 3300–3305, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. C. Parlayan, S. Ikeda, N. Sato, M. Sawabe, M. Muramatsu, and T. Arai, “Association analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms in miR-146a and miR-196a2 on the prevalence of cancer in elderly Japanese: a case-control study,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 2101–2107, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. M. Okubo, T. Tahara, T. Shibata et al., “Association between common genetic variants in pre-microRNAs and gastric cancer risk in Japanese population,” Helicobacter, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 524–531, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. S. Peng, Z. Kuang, C. Sheng, Y. Zhang, H. Xu, and Q. Cheng, “Association of MicroRNA-196a-2 gene polymorphism with gastric cancer risk in a Chinese population,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 2288–2293, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. P. Dikeakos, G. Theodoropoulos, S. Rizos, N. Tzanakis, G. Zografos, and M. Gazouli, “Association of the miR-146aC>G, miR-149T>C, and miR-196a2T>C polymorphisms with gastric cancer risk and survival in the Greek population,” Molecular Biology Reports, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 1075–1080, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. D. H. Ahn, H. Rah, Y.-K. Choi et al., “Association of the miR-146aC>G, miR-149T>C, miR-196a2T>C, and miR-499A>G polymorphisms with gastric cancer risk and survival in the korean population,” Molecular Carcinogenesis, vol. 52, supplement 1, pp. 39–51, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. A. Hishida, K. Matsuo, Y. Goto et al., “Combined effect of miR-146a rs2910164 G/C polymorphism and toll-like receptor 4 +3725 G/C polymorphism on the risk of severe gastric atrophy in Japanese,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1131–1137, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. Y. Zeng, Q. M. Sun, N. N. Liu et al., “Correlation between pre-miR-146a C/G polymorphism and gastric cancer risk in Chinese population,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 16, no. 28, pp. 3578–3583, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. S. Wang, G. Tao, D. Wu et al., “A functional polymorphism in MIR196A2 is associated with risk and prognosis of gastric cancer,” Molecular Carcinogenesis, vol. 52, supplement 1, pp. 87–95, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. F. Zhou, H. Zhu, D. Luo et al., “A functional polymorphism in pre-miR-146a is associated with susceptibility to gastric cancer in a chinese population,” DNA and Cell Biology, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1290–1295, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. J. Kupcinskas, T. Wex, A. Link et al., “Gene polymorphisms of micrornas in helicobacter pylori-induced high risk atrophic gastritis and gastric cancer,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 1, Article ID e87467, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. Q. Yang, Z. Jie, J. Wang et al., “Association between miR-196a rs11614913 C/T polymorphisms and gastric cancer susceptibility,” Academic Journal of Guangzhou Medical College, vol. 41, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  27. J.-Y. Pu, W. Dong, L. Zhang, W.-B. Liang, Y. Yang, and M.-L. Lv, “No association between single nucleotide polymorphisms in pre-mirnas and the risk of gastric cancer in Chinese population,” Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 128–133, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  28. J. Lau, J. P. A. Ioannidis, and C. H. Schmid, “Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 127, no. 9, pp. 820–826, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. N. Mantel and W. Haenszel, “Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 22, pp. 719–748, 1959. View at: Google Scholar
  30. R. DerSimonian and N. Laird, “Meta-analysis in clinical trials,” Controlled Clinical Trials, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 177–188, 1986. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. R. DerSimonian and R. Kacker, “Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update,” Contemporary Clinical Trials, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 105–114, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. J. P. T. Higgins and S. G. Thompson, “Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 21, no. 11, pp. 1539–1558, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. J. Ma, L. Hong, Z. Chen, Y. Nie, and D. Fan, “Epigenetic regulation of microRNAs in gastric cancer,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 716–723, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. F. Wang, G. P. Sun, Y. F. Zou, J. Q. Hao, F. Zhong, and W. J. Ren, “MicroRNAs as promising biomarkers for gastric cancer,” Cancer Biomarkers, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 259–267, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. F. Tong, P. Cao, Y. Yin, S. Xia, R. Lai, and S. Liu, “MicroRNAs in gastric cancer: from benchtop to bedside,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 24–30, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. K. Jazdzewski, E. L. Murray, K. Franssila, B. Jarzab, D. R. Schoenberg, and A. De La Chapelle, “Common SNP in pre-miR-146a decreases mature miR expression and predisposes to papillary thyroid carcinoma,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 20, pp. 7269–7274, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. T. Xu, Y. Zhu, Q.-K. Wei et al., “A functional polymorphism in the miR-146a gene is associated with the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 2126–2131, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. J. Shen, C. B. Ambrosone, R. A. DiCioccio, K. Odunsi, S. B. Lele, and H. Zhao, “A functional polymorphism in the miR-146a gene and age of familial breast/ovarian cancer diagnosis,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1963–1966, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. C. Yue, M. Wang, B. Ding et al., “Polymorphism of the pre-miR-146a is associated with risk of cervical cancer in a Chinese population,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 122, no. 1, pp. 33–37, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. S. Ishihara, M. A. K. Rumi, Y. Kadowaki et al., “Essential role of MD-2 in TLR4-dependent signaling during Helicobacter pylori-associated gastritis,” The Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 2, pp. 1406–1416, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. S. Akira and K. Takeda, “Toll-like receptor signalling,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 499–511, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. M.-Z. Qiu, M.-Y. Cai, D.-S. Zhang et al., “Clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic analysis of Lauren classification in gastric adenocarcinoma in China,” Journal of Translational Medicine, vol. 11, no. 1, article 58, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. Z. Hu, J. Chen, T. Tian et al., “Genetic variants of miRNA sequences and non-small cell lung cancer survival,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 118, no. 7, pp. 2600–2608, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. Y. Ye, K. K. Wang, J. Gu et al., “Genetic variations in MicroRNA-related genes are novel susceptibility loci for esophageal cancer risk,” Cancer Prevention Research, vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 460–469, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. P. Qi, T.-H. Dou, L. Geng et al., “Association of a variant in MIR 196A2 with susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma in male Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection,” Human Immunology, vol. 71, no. 6, pp. 621–626, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. C. L. Christensen, T. Gjetting, T. T. Poulsen, F. Cramer, J. A. Roth, and H. S. Poulsen, “Targeted cytosine deaminase-uracil phosphoribosyl transferase suicide gene therapy induces small cell lung cancer-specific cytotoxicity and tumor growth delay,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 2308–2319, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. X. D. Li, Z. G. Li, X. X. Song, and C. F. Liu, “A variant in microRNA-196a2 is associated with susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma in Chinese patients with cirrhosis,” Pathology, vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 669–673, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. C. J. Chen, Y. Zhang, L. Zhang, S. M. Weakley, and Q. Yao, “MicroRNA-196: critical roles and clinical applications in development and cancer,” Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 14–23, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. H. Akhavan-Niaki and A. A. Samadani, “Molecular insight in gastric cancer induction: an overview of cancer stemness genes,” Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics, vol. 68, pp. 463–473, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. M. Perretti and J. Dalli, “Exploiting the Annexin A1 pathway for the development of novel anti-inflammatory therapeutics,” British Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 158, no. 4, pp. 936–946, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. A. S. Damazo, R. J. Flower, E. Solito, and S. M. Oliani, “Annexin-A1 gene expression during liver development and post-translation modification after experimental endotoxemia,” Inflammation Research, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 97–103, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. S. Maschler, C. A. Gebeshuber, E.-M. Wiedemann et al., “Annexin A1 attenuates EMT and metastatic potential in breast cancer,” EMBO Molecular Medicine, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 401–414, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. Z.-Q. Zhang, X.-J. Li, G.-T. Liu, Y. Ping, Y. Xia, and H. Wen, “Identification of Annexin A1 protein expression in human gastric adenocarcinoma using proteomics and tissue microarray,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 19, no. 43, pp. 7795–7803, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. A. F. T. Rossi, M. C. Duarte, A. B. Poltronieri et al., “Deregulation of annexin-A1 and galectin-1 expression in precancerous gastric lesions: intestinal metaplasia and gastric ulcer,” Mediators of Inflammation, vol. 2014, Article ID 478138, 11 pages, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. S.-I. Akaboshi, S. Watanabe, Y. Hino et al., “HMGA1 is induced by Wnt/β-catenin pathway and maintains cell proliferation in gastric cancer,” The American Journal of Pathology, vol. 175, no. 4, pp. 1675–1685, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. B. He, Y. Pan, W. C. Cho et al., “The association between four genetic variants in MicroRNAs (rs11614913, rs2910164, rs3746444, rs2292832) and cancer risk: evidence from published studies,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 11, Article ID e49032, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. X. P. Ma, T. Zhang, B. Peng, L. Yu, and D. K. Jiang, “Association between microRNA polymorphisms and cancer risk based on the findings of 66 case-control studies,” PLoS ONE, vol. 8, no. 11, Article ID e79584, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. Y. Q. Xu, L. Gu, Y. Q. Pan et al., “Different effects of three polymorphisms in microRNAs on cancer risk in Asian population: evidence from published literatures,” PLoS ONE, vol. 8, no. 6, Article ID e65123, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. Z. Yin, L. Yan, Z. Cui, X. Li, Y. Ren, and B. Zhou, “Effects of common polymorphisms rs2910164 in miR-146a and rs3746444 in miR-499 on cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis,” Molecular Biology Reports, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 3003–3013, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. Y.-J. Li, Z.-Y. Zhang, Y.-Y. Mao et al., “A genetic variant in MIR-146a modifies digestive system cancer risk: a meta-analysis,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 145–150, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. J. Guo, M. Jin, M. Zhang, and K. Chen, “A genetic variant in miR-196a2 increased digestive system cancer risks: a meta-analysis of 15 case-control studies,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 1, Article ID e30585, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. J. Wang, J. Bi, X. Liu, K. Li, J. Di, and B. Wang, “Has-miR-146a polymorphism (rs2910164) and cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 19 case-control studies,” Molecular Biology Reports, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 4571–4579, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. H. Zhang, Y.-L. Su, H. Yu, and B.-Y. Qian, “Meta-analysis of the association between miR-196a-2 polymorphism and cancer susceptibility,” Cancer Biology & Medicine, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 63–72, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. X. H. Xu, X. D. Yang, G. Ru et al., “miR-146a gene polymorphism rs2910164 and the risk of digestive tumors: a meta-analysis of 21 case-control studies,” Oncology Reports, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 472–479, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. D. Wu, F. Wang, W.-Q. Dai et al., “The miR-146a rs2910164 G > C polymorphism and susceptibility to digestive cancer in chinese,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 399–403, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. F. Wang, G. P. Sun, Y. F. Zou, L. L. Fan, and B. Song, “Quantitative assessment of the association between miR-196a2 rs11614913 polymorphism and gastrointestinal cancer risk,” Molecular Biology Reports, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 109–116, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  67. Z. Wang, J. Wu, G. Zhang, Y. Cao, C. Jiang, and Y. Ding, “Associations of miR-499 and miR-34b/c polymorphisms with susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma: an evidence-based evaluation,” Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2013, Article ID 719202, 8 pages, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. Z. Wang, Y. Cao, C. Jiang, G. Yang, J. Wu, and Y. Ding, “Lack of association of two common polymorphisms rs2910164 and rs11614913 with susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 6, Article ID e40039, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2015 Qing Ni 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

1154 Views | 469 Downloads | 6 Citations
 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted research articles as well as case reports and case series related to COVID-19. Review articles are excluded from this waiver policy. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.